<i>N</i>-Halamine-Containing Electrospun Fibers Kill Bacteria via a Contact/Release Co-Determined Antibacterial Pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
N-Halamine-based antibacterial materials play a significant role in controlling microbial contamination, but their practical applications are limited because of their complicated synthetic process and indistinct antibacterial actions. In this study, novel antibacterial N-halamine-containing polymer fibers were synthesized via an one-step electrospinning of N-halamine-containing polymers without any additives. By adjusting the concentration of precursor and the molecular weight of polymers, the morphology and size of the as-spun N-halamine-containing fibers can be regulated. The as-spun fibers showed antibacterial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. After an antibacterial assessment using different biochemical techniques, a combined mechanism of contact/release co-determined killing action was evidenced for the as-spun N-halamine-containing fibers. With the aid of contact action and/or release action, this combined mechanism can allow N-halamines to attack bacteria, making the as-spun fibers wide in the application of antibacterial fields, whatever it is in dry or wet environment. Also, a recycle antibacterial test demonstrated that the as-spun fibers can still offer antibacterial property after five recycle experiments.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".