Atividade antimicrobiana in vitro de baccharis, tamarindo, líquido da casca da castanha de caju e óleo de cravo contra bactérias ruminais Gram-negativas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the in vitro antibacterial activity of Baccharis dracunculifolia and Tamarindus indica L. aqueous extract, cashew nut shell liquid (CNSL) natural extracts, and clove essential oil (EO) against five species of Gram-negative ruminal bacteria. Cultures were grown in anaerobic media containing 0.1, 0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 mg mL-1 of the extracts or oils. Growth was evaluated by monitoring the optical density (OD 600 nm) at intervals of 0, 8, 12 and 24 hours of incubation at 39° C. The baccharis and tamarind aqueous extract, and CNSL natural extract inhibited the growth of Prevotella albensis, Prevotella bryantii, Treponema saccharophilum and Succinivibrio dextrinosolvens. For Prevotella ruminicola and Succinivibrio dextrinosolvens, the addition of the clove leaf EO of 1.0 mg mL-1 resulted in a greater impact on growth dynamics, with a reduction in optical density in all intervals of observations. The findings of this research establish the efficacy of natural additives aqueous extracts of baccharis and tamarind, CNSL, and clove essential oil, in antimicrobial activity in vitro against the Gram-negative ruminal bacteria analyzed.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".