Analysis of Hydroxyl Radicals and Inactivation Mechanisms of Bacteriophage MS2 in Response to a Simultaneous Application of UV and Chlorine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The simultaneous application of UV and chlorine (expressed as UV/Cl 2 ) as a water treatment method may be a good disinfection option for UV-resistant microorganisms, such as human adenoviruses (HAdVs). In this study, we developed two approaches using UV/Cl 2: one to quantitate the OH• radicals based on the degradation of the probe compound para -chlorobenzoic acid ( p CBA) and the other to use bacteriophage MS2 to understand the virus inactivation mechanisms in response to UV, chlorine and UV/Cl 2 disinfection using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), attachment and genome penetration assays. The results revealed that OH• radicals were produced at a concentration of 2.70 × 10 –14 M in the UV/Cl 2 treatment with a practical chlorine dose of 1 mg/L and with a minimum UV 254 fluence of approximately 10 mJ/cm 2, whereas UV or chlorine alone did not produce OH• radicals. In the UV/Cl 2 treatment, synergistic effects on viral genome damage were observed, but were not directly due to OH• radicals. The ability of MS2 to penetrate the genome of the host bacteria was impaired, but its ability to attach to the host was not affected by the treatment. We concluded that the major cause of virus inactivation in response to UV/Cl 2 was the damage to the viral genome caused by combination actions of chlorine species and OH• radicals.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".