Comparative Study of Different Sampling Methods of Biofilm Formed on Stainless-Steel Surfaces in a CDC Biofilm Reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The formation of biofilms in dairy processing plants can reduce equipment efficiency, contribute to surface deterioration, and contaminate dairy products by releasing the microorganisms they contain, which may cause spoilage or disease. However, a more representative identification of microbial communities and physico-chemical characterization requires to detach and recover adequately the entire biofilm from the surface. The aim of this study is to develop an efficient technique for in-plant biofilm sampling by growing a strain of Pseudomonas azotoformans PFl1A on stainless-steel surface in a dynamic CDC biofilm reactor system using tryptic soy broth (TSB) and milk as growth media. Different techniques, namely, swabbing, scraping, sonic brushing, synthetic sponge, and sonicating synthetic sponge were used and the results were compared to a standard ASTM International method using ultrasonication. Their efficiencies were evaluated by cells enumeration and scanning electron microscopy. The maximum total viable counts of 8.65 ± 0.06, 8.75 ± 0.08, and 8.71 ± 0.09 log CFU/cm 2 were obtained in TSB medium using scraping, synthetic sponge, and sonicating synthetic sponge, respectively, which showed no statistically significant differences with the standard method, ultrasonication (8.74 ± 0.02 log CFU/cm 2 ). However, a significantly ( p < 0.05) lower cell recovery of 8.57 ± 0.10 and 8.60 ± 0.00 log CFU/cm 2 compared to ultrasonication were achieved for swabbing and sonic brushing, respectively. Furthermore, scanning electron microscopy showed an effective removal of biofilms by sonic brushing, synthetic sponge, and sonicating synthetic sponge; However, only the latter two methods guaranteed a superior release of bacterial biofilm into suspension. Nevertheless, a combination of sonication and synthetic sponge ensured dislodging of sessile cells from surface crevices. The results suggest that a sonicating synthetic sponge could be a promising method for biofilm recovery in processing plants, which can be practically used in the dairy industries as an alternative to ultrasonication.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".