Effect of green microalgal extracts exhibiting antibacterial activity on viability of human malignant and non‐malignant cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY Microalgae have been investigated for their ability to produce metabolites that exhibit antibacterial activity. However, as research on antibacterial activity progresses, the effect of microalgal extracts on mammalian cells needs to be also assessed. The in vitro effect of microalgal extracts with demonstrated antibacterial activity against the human opportunistic pathogen Staphylococcus aureus was examined on the viability of non‐malignant (MCF10A and 184B5 cells) and malignant human cell lines (A2780 and MCF7). Direct cell counts indicated that the MTT (3‐(4,5‐dimethylthiazol‐2‐yl)‐2,5‐diphenyltetrazolium bromide) proliferation assay was found to under/overestimate cell viability when specific microalgal extracts and/or concentrations were tested. From direct cell counts, the viability of non‐malignant cells was not reduced after exposure to the extracts, whereas the viability of malignant cells was affected by specific microalgal extracts and concentrations. The results suggest that green microalgae are worthy of further investigation as potential sources of antibiotics, since they did not show a negative effect on the non‐malignant cell lines, MCF10A and 184B5. Additional studies should evaluate the compounds responsible for the anti‐proliferative activity of specific microalgal extracts observed on the malignant cells A2780 and MCF7.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".