Monoclonal Antibodies Showing Surface Reactivity with <i>Lactobacillus</i> and <i>Pediococcus</i> Beer Spoilage Bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) were isolated based upon reactivity with both a Lactobacillus and a Pediococcus beer spoilage isolate. Immunoblot analysis and Proteinase K treatment both suggested that none of the antigens recognized by the Mabs were proteins. Since the Mabs were known to bind surface-accessible antigenic sites on Gram-positive bacteria, it was proposed that lipoteichoic acid (LTA) was the antigen recognized. Each of the Mabs was purified and conjugated with horseradish peroxidase. Isolation of LTA, followed by direct antibody binding and antibody competition enzyme immunoassays, confirmed this. To determine whether the five Mabs were binding the same site on the LTA, the ability of each Mab to inhibit the binding of each of the enzyme-conjugated Mabs was determined. The data obtained allow us to propose that the five Mabs recognize three spatially distinct epitopes on the bacterial LTA. As the Mabs were found to bind to most beer spoilage Lactobacillus and Pediococcus isolates tested, these Mabs could prove useful in rapid detection of these Gram-positive beer-spoilage bacteria.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".