Assessing the Activity of Antimicrobial Peptides Against Common Marine Bacteria Located in Rotifer (Brachionus plicatilis) Cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rotifers are used as the first feed for marine fish larvae and are grown in large cultures that have high loads of organic matter and heterotrophic bacteria; these bacteria are passed on to the developing fish larvae and can potentially lead to bacterial infections. A modified minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) protocol for antimicrobial peptides was used to determine the potency of ten antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) in artificial seawater relevant to a rotifer culture (salinity of 25‰) against common marine pathogens. All of the AMPs had antimicrobial activity against the bacterial isolates when the salt concentration was approximately zero. However, in high salt concentrations, the majority of the AMPs had an MIC value greater than 65 µg mL −1 in artificial seawater (25‰). The only exceptions were 2009 (32.5 µg mL −1 ) and 3002 (32.5 µg mL −1 ) against Vibrio rotiferianus and Tenacibaculum discolor , respectively. The selected synthetic AMPs were not effective at reducing the bacterial load in brackish salt concentrations of a typical commercial rotifer culture (25‰).
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".