MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2793880322 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy009.282

A282 EFFECTS OF BIFIDOBACTERIUM BIFIDUM IN MICE INFECTED WITH CITROBACTER RODENTIUM.

2018· article· en· W2793880322 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bijun Wen, Amel Taïbi, Christopher Villa, Sofia Sagaidak, S Lee, Elena M. Comelli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitrobacter rodentiumBifidobacterium bifidumFecesProbioticMicrobiologyHyperplasiaBiologyPathogenImmunologyMedicineInternal medicineBacteriaLactobacillus acidophilus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various strains of Bifidobacterium bifidum are probiotics with beneficial properties in intestinal inflammation, including pathogen infection. B. bifidum strain MIMBb75 (BB75) sustains intestinal homeostasis and mitigates intestinal discomfort in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Citrobacter rodentium is a murine pathogen causing transmissible colonic hyperplasia and colitis with pathogenicity similar to foodborne enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7 in humans and with features of inflammatory bowel disease. This study aimed to examine if oral administration of B. bifidum MIMBb75 attenuates pathology associated with C. rodentium infection. C57Bl6/J male mice were randomized into 4 groups; groups 1 and 2 received BB75 daily (109 CFU/ml in 200 µl PBS by gavage) starting 7 days before (group 1), or on the same day (group 2) as C. rodentium infection (109 CFU/ml in 100 µl LB-culture); groups 3 and 4 received sterile PBS and served as infection (group 3) and sham (group 4) controls. Mice were sacrificed at day 10 post-infection (p.i.). Fecal C. rodentium and B. bifidum load were assessed by culturing and qPCR, respectively. Crypt hyperplasia and intestinal inflammation were assessed by histology. Barrier integrity was evaluated by pathogen translocation to secondary organs and in vivo permeability test. C. rodentium infection resulted in colonic hyperplasia, inflammation and barrier dysfunction. Fecal C. rodentium viable count increased and reached a plateau (1010CFU/g of feces) at day 10 p.i., with clearance on day 24 p.i., regardless of probiotic treatment (p>0.05). B. bifidum administration resulted in 107 cells/g of feces, with no effect of timing of administration (p>0.05). Though, B. bifidum treatment did not attenuate crypt hyperplasia nor inflammation associated with the infection (p>0.05). These data suggest that C. rodentium and B. bifidum can co-exist in the gut with no mutual displacement; this is in line with research showing that BB75 is well equipped for gut colonization. However, in this experimental setting, BB75 cannot counteract C. rodentium pathology. Findings from this study may provide insights for the understanding of probiotics behavior and their clinical relevance in intestinal inflammation. NSERC and JP Bickell Foundation to Elena M Comelli; NSERC Alexander Graham Bell Canada Graduate Scholarship to Bijun Wen.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicProbiotics and Fermented Foods→French-language works237,207→