Efficacy of Salmonella Bacteriophage S1 Delivered and Released by Alginate Beads in a Chicken Model of Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".