Preparation and Characterization of Antibacterial Films with Eggshell-Membrane Biopolymers Incorporated with Chitosan and Plant Extracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of films containing chitosan (CS), eggshell membrane (ESM), soluble eggshell membrane (SEP), and plant extracts from Thymus vulgaris and Origanum valgare were prepared with varying concentrations and compositions. These novel films were characterized extensively with respect to film thickness and uniformity, solution absorption, degradation, microenvironmental pH, and antibacterial properties. All the films were flexible with appropriate mechanical stability. After 48 h of soaking in a lysozyme solution, all the films degraded 64 ± 4%, which would be expected to allow for the release of the plant extracts. The plant extracts on their own showed a pH of approximately 4, with the blended films having microenvironmental pHs from approximately 6.4–7.0, which would be expected to promote wound healing. A CS-ESM-SEP film with 5% of each plant extract inhibited almost all E. coli growth in liquid cultures and had no detriments to fluid absorption. Fluid absorption was approximately 100–150% by weight for all the films. The incorporation of SEP and plant extracts to a CS-ESM film provides a promising and novel method for the incorporation of SEP and antibacterial agents in a film with no detriment to wound fluid absorption or film degradation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".