Hydrodynamic Effects on Biofilms at the Biointerface Using a Microfluidic Electrochemical Cell: Case Study of <i>Pseudomonas sp.</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anchoring biofilm layer is expected to exhibit a different response to environmental stresses than for portions in the bulk, due to the protection from other strata and the proximity to the attachment surface. The effect of hydrodynamic stress on surface-adhered biofilm layers was tested using a specially designed microfluidic bio flow cell with an embedded three-electrode detection system. In situ electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) measurements of biocapacitance and bioresistance of Pseudomonas sp. biofilms were conducted during the growth phase and under different shear flow conditions with verification by other surface sensitive techniques. Distinct, but reversible changes to the amount of biofilm and its structure at the attachment surface were observed during the application of elevated shear stress. In contrast, regular microscopy revealed permanent distortion to the biofilm bulk, in the form of streamers and ripples. Following the application of extreme shear stresses, complete removal of significant portions of biofilm outer layers occurred, but this did not change the measured quantity of biofilm at the electrode attachment surface. The structure of the remaining biofilm, however, appeared to be modified and susceptible to further changes following application of shear stress directly to the unprotected biofilm layers at the attachment surface.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".