Phenolic-rich extracts from acerola, cashew apple and mango by-products cause diverse inhibitory effects and cell damages on enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study aimed to evaluate the inhibitory effects of phenolic-rich extracts from acerola (Malpighia emarginata D.C., PEA), cashew apple (Anacardium occidentale L., PEC) and mango (Mangifera indica L., PEM) by-products on distinct enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) strains. The capability of PEA and PEC of impairing various physiological functions of ETEC strains was investigated with multiparametric flow cytometry. Procyanidin B2, myricetin and p-coumaric acid were the major phenolic compounds in PEA, PEC and PEM, respectively. PEA and PEC had lower minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) (MIC: 31·25 mg ml−1; MBC: 62·5 mg ml−1) on ETEC strains than PEM (MIC and MIC: >1000 mg ml−1). PEA and PEC (15·6, 31·2, 62·5 mg ml−1) caused viable count reductions (P < 0·05) on ETEC strains after 24 h of exposure, notably the ≥3 log reductions caused by 62·5 mg ml−1. The 24 h exposure of ETEC strains to PEA and PEC (31·2, 62·5 mg ml−1) led to high sizes of cell subpopulations with concomitant impairments in cell membrane polarization and permeability, as well as in enzymatic, respiratory and efflux activities. PEA and PEC are effective in inhibiting ETEC through a multi-target action mode with disturbance in different physiological functions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".