MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202878268 · doi:10.3390/v13101932

Efficacy of Salmonella Bacteriophage S1 Delivered and Released by Alginate Beads in a Chicken Model of Infection

2021· article· en· W3202878268 on OpenAlexaff
Janeth Gómez-García, Alejandra Chávez-Carbajal, Nallelyt Segundo-Arizmendi, Miriam Guadalupe Barón-Pichardo, Susana Mendoza‐Elvira, Efrén Hernández-Baltazar, Alexander P. Hynes, Oscar Torres-Ángeles

Bibliographic record

VenueViruses · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacteriophageSalmonellaMicrobiologyVirologyBiologyBacteriaEscherichia coliGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern bacteriophage encapsulation methods based on polymers such as alginate have been developed recently for their use in phage therapy for veterinary purposes. In birds, it has been proven that using this delivery system allows the release of the bacteriophage in the small intestine, the site of infection by Salmonella spp. This work designed an approach for phage therapy using encapsulation by ionotropic gelation of the lytic bacteriophage S1 for Salmonella enterica in 2% w/v alginate beads using 2% w/v calcium chloride as crosslinking agent. This formulation resulted in beads with an average size of 3.73 ± 0.04 mm and an encapsulation efficiency of 70%. In vitro, the beads protected the bacteriophages from pH 3 and released them at higher pH. To confirm that this would protect the bacteriophages from gastrointestinal pH changes, we tested the phage infectivity in vivo assay. Using a model chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) infected with Salmonella Enteritidis, we confirmed that after 3 h of the beads delivery, infective phages were present in the chicken’s duodenal and caecal sections. This study demonstrates that our phage formulation is an effective system for release and delivery of bacteriophage S1 against Salmonella Enteritidis with potential use in the poultry sector.

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 score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVirusesSame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207