Shelf Life of Azospirillum brasilense in Alginate Beads Enriched With Trehalose and Humic Acid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since abiotic and biotic factors can compromise the survival of bacteria and their viability, encapsulation of cells in biodegradable gel matrices, a biological macromolecule, is one alternative to have their shelf life extended. Here, it was developed a gel-based formulation of the bioinoculant Azospirillum brasilense strain AbV5 and determined the effect of trehalose and humic acid supplementation in viability and survival of bacteria. For each 2 ml of sodium alginate solution (3%), 1 ml of the inoculum was extruded in a solution containing sodium alginate complexed with calcium chloride, forming calcium alginate beads. Supplements were used in a ratio of 2:2:1. Treatments were peat; alginate; alginate + humic acid; alginate + trehalose 0.1 M; alginate + trehalose 1 M. Morphometric aspects, survival rate and viability were determined in 9 storage periods (3, 5, 7, 14, 21, 30, 45, 60, 90 days). As results, beads were able to sustain the growth of A. brasilense for 90 days. Shelf life quality decreased in all treatments and peat remained the best carrier. Encapsulation, despite promoting the greatest losses in the survival of bacteria in the first days, ensured better cell viability. Trehalose in low concentrations (0.1M) improved cell viability during storage, optimizing plant inoculation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".