MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Novel Isolates of Lactobacilli from Crop of Algerian Poultry as Potential Probiotic for Food Industry

2016· article· en· W2528520099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tayeb Idoui, Mohamed Sifour

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biotechnology for Wellness Industries · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbioticLactobacillus plantarumBiologyStrain (injury)Lactobacillus fermentum16S ribosomal RNAMicrobiologyFood scienceLactobacillusCropBacteriaGeneFermentationLactic acidBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was aimed at selecting novel strains of Lactobacillus from crop of Algerian poultry. One hundred forty (140) lactobacilli strains were isolated and examined for their potentiality probiotic properties. From these isolated strains, nine appear to possess a probiotic value and highlighted a noticeable heterogeneity. The isolate L. plantarum G 1 showed the best inhibitory activity against several indicator strains. Furthermore, the results showed that culture and neutralized supernatants exhibited varying degrees of inhibitory activity against strains of enterobacteria from poultry origin. The tested strains were acid resistant and were also bile tolerant. Antibiotic resistance, co-aggregation activity and hydrophobicity percentage were strain-dependent. Moreover, six strains were able to adhere to epithelial cells. Finally, six Lactobacillus strains, such as strain L. plantarum G 1, L. plantarum PC 2 , L. viridesencs G 3 , L. helveticus PC 6 , L. delbrueckii ssp delbrueckii G 7 and L. fermentum PC 8 , showed essential probiotic properties. The identity of the best strain L. plantarum G1 was confirmed by 16S rRNA gene sequence using PCR.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Biotechnology for Wellness IndustriesSame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207