MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201043657 · doi:10.32393/csme.2021.249

Microencapsulation And Subsequent In-Situ Incubation Of Marine Bacteria For The Discovery Of Novel Natural Products

2021· article· en· W3201043657 on OpenAlex
Emily Pope, Christopher Cartmell, Bradley Haltli, Ali Ahmadi, Russell G. Kerr

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Canadian Mechanical Engineering. Volume 4 · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInnovative Microfluidic and Catalytic Techniques Innovation
Canadian institutionsNautilus Biosciences (Canada)University of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn situIncubationBacteriaNatural (archaeology)Computer scienceBiochemical engineeringChemistryBiologyEngineeringBiochemistryPaleontologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite difficulty in successfully culturing the vast majority of microbes present within the natural world, microbes continue to be a significant source of natural products. Consequently, various methods, including, but not limited to, modification of media composition and growth characteristics, single cell isolation, and in-situ incubation, have been employed over the years in an attempt to improve microbial recovery from environmental samples. To improve microbial recovery, the effect of microencapsulation followed by in-situ incubation on the abundance, viability and diversity of bacteria recovered from marine sediment samples was examined. Marine bacteria dislodged from sediments samples were concentrated by centrifugation and either resuspended (control) or encapsulated and then incubated within modified dialysis cassettes for a week in their natural environment. The effect of encapsulation and in situ incubation on the recovery of marine sediment bacteria was determined by assessing abundance, viability and diversity before and after incubation. While the abundance, viability and diversity were not significantly different between resuspended and encapsulated samples before incubation, significant differences were observed between the samples following in situ incubation. The abundance of colonies observed for the resuspended samples was significantly greater than that of the encapsulated samples, while the viability and diversity of encapsulated samples was significantly greater than the resuspended samples. The results of this study suggest microencapsulation followed by in-situ incubation results in recovery of a different composition of bacteria compared to traditional cultivation, thus improving the diversity of bacteria recovered from marine sediment. Conversely, the greater abundance of growth observed from resuspended samples is likely due to the overgrowth of more common, faster growing species rather than rare species as both overall viability and diversity of resuspended samples were significantly lower than encapsulated samples. While future studies should aim to perform a comprehensive assessment of bacterial diversity obtained using this new technique, this pilot study indicates the benefits of microencapsulation followed by in-situ incubation compared to previous culture methods.

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.

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 score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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