MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402965791 · doi:10.3390/microbiolres15040132

A Review of Bacterial Biofilm Components and Formation, Detection Methods, and Their Prevention and Control on Food Contact Surfaces

2024· review· en· W4402965791 on OpenAlexaff
Amin N. Olaimat, Ahmad Mohammad Ababneh, Murad Al‐Holy, Anas A. Al‐Nabulsi, Tareq M. Osaili, Mahmoud Abughoush, Mutamed Ayyash, Richard A. Holley

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofilmNanotechnologyBiochemical engineeringMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceBiologyEngineeringBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The microbial biofilms are a community of microorganisms that adhere to each other and to surfaces, typically in a mucilaginous or gel-like matrix composed of extracellular polymeric substances, including polysaccharides, proteins, lipids, and DNA. In the food industry, the bacterial biofilms may be formed on different surfaces and cause post-processing contamination or cross-contamination from the food contact surfaces to food products. Conventional cleaning and sanitizing methods are often ineffective at removing bacterial biofilms. Among more recent alternative methods proposed to address this problem are the use of hydrolytic enzymes, essential oils, and bacteriocins. These methods show promise since their antibacterial and antibiofilm actions involve degradation of the extracellular polymeric matrix of the biofilm and lead to inhibition of the foodborne pathogens present. Understanding the limitations and mechanisms of action of enzymes, bacteriocins, and essential oils in controlling bacterial biofilms on foods and food contact surfaces is essential for developing solutions to prevent and control biofilm formation. This review critically summarizes the current knowledge of bacterial biofilm components, their formation, detection methods, prevention, and removal from food contact surfaces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology ResearchSame topicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensingFrench-language works237,207