Thermal-Stability and Reconstitution Ability of Listeria Phages P100 and A511
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study evaluated the thermal-stability of Listeria phages P100 and A511 at temperatures simulating the preparation of ready-to-eat meats. The phage infectivity after heating to 71 °C and holding for a minimum of 30 s, before eventually cooling to 4 °C were examined. Higher temperatures of 75, 80, and 85 °C were also tested to evaluate their effect on phages thermal-stability. This study found that despite minor differences in the amino acid sequences of their structural proteins, the two phages responded differently to high temperatures. P100 activity declined at least 10 log (PFU mL-1) with exposure to 71 °C (30 s) and falling below the limit of detection (1 log PFU mL-1) while, A511 dropped from 108 to 105 PFU mL-1. Cooling resulted in partial reconstitution of P100 phage particles to 103 PFU mL-1. Exposure to 75 °C (30 s) abolished A511 activity (8 log PFU mL-1) and both phages showed reconstitution during cooling phase after exposure to 75 °C. P100 exhibited reconstitution after treatment at 80 °C (30 s), conversely A511 showed no reconstitution activity. Heating P100 to 85 °C abolished the reconstitution potential. Substantial differences were found in thermal-stability and reconstitution of the examined phages showing A511 to be more thermo-stable than P100, while P100 exhibited reconstitution during cooling after treatment at 80 C which was absent in A511. The differences in predicted melting temperatures of structural proteins of P100 and A511 were consistent with the observed differences in thermal stability and morphological changes observed with transmission electron microscopy.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".