MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911361340 · doi:10.3390/microorganisms7020051

Effects of Bifidobacterium bifidum in Mice Infected with Citrobacter rodentium

2019· article· en· W2911361340 on OpenAlexafffund
Bijun Wen, Amel Taïbi, Christopher Villa, S H Lee, Sofia Sagaidak, Elena M. Comelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroorganisms · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of TorontoJ.P. Bickell FoundationJames H. Cummings Foundation
KeywordsCitrobacter rodentiumBifidobacterium bifidumProbioticIn vivoBiologyMicrobiologyFecesInflammationIntestinal mucosaBifidobacteriumImmunologyMedicineLactobacillusInternal medicineBacteriaLactobacillus acidophilus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In vitro and in vivo studies suggest that selected Bifidobacterium bifidum strains sustain intestinal homeostasis. This study aimed to examine whether the administration of B. bifidum MIMBb75 (BB75) attenuates Citrobacter rodentium infection, a murine model for enteric infection and inflammatory bowel disease in humans. C57Bl6/J mice were randomized to receive BB75 daily starting before or after C. rodentium infection. BB75 load and infection kinetics were monitored. On day 10 post-infection (p.i.), histological parameters of the large intestine were assessed. Barrier integrity was evaluated by pathogen translocation to secondary organs and in vivo permeability test. Fecal C. rodentium load peaked at 1010 CFU/g at day 10 p.i., with clearance at day 24 p.i., regardless of probiotic treatment. BB75 administration resulted in 107 cells/g of feces with no effect of timing of administration. BB75 treatment did not attenuate C. rodentium-induced crypt hyperplasia nor inflammation. C. rodentium and BB75 can co-exist in the gut with no mutual displacement. However, BB75 cannot counteract C. rodentium pathology. Our findings provide insight for the understanding of probiotics behavior and their clinical relevance in intestinal inflammation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.150
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroorganismsSame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207