Isolation of yeast from some Ethiopian traditional fermented beverages and in vitro evaluation for probiotic traits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h2>Abstract</h2> Traditional fermented foods and beverages are important sources of probiotic microbes. The purpose of this study was to isolate yeast from Ethiopian fermented beverages and assess their probiotic activity in an <i>in vitro</i> setting. Yeast isolation, identification, and <i>in vitro</i> probiotic trait screening were conducted in accordance with established protocols. Eleven isolates were obtained. Of them, GB1D5, RTj3D3 and DMTD2 were low hydrogen sulfide producers and were selected. The D1/2 genotyping of selected isolates revealed that they were strains of <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>. All strains grew well at low pH, body temperature, bile salt concentrations (0.3–0.6 (w/v)) and survived at simulated gastrointestinal conditions with survival percentages of 12.8 ± 4.9 to 14.4 ± 5.0 % and 5.3 ± 1.7–5.9 ± 1.8 %, respectively. They demonstrated surface hydrophobicity ranging from 61.3 to 68.7 %; and 80.7–86 % auto-aggregation percentages after 24 h of incubation. They also showed hydroxyl radical scavenging activity ranging between 91.6 and 92.3 % and mild inhibitory activity against <i>Escherichia coli</i> (ATCC 893614) and <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (ATCC 892760). The PCA revealed that two strains (DMTD2 and RTj3D3) have a strong association with most probiotic properties, which affirms their promising candidacy. Safety assessments indicated that they were resistant to antibacterial antibiotics, susceptible to antifungals, and negative for protease, gelatinase, biogenic amine production, and hemolytic activity. All these suggest that they are promising candidates for the production of food containing probiotics. Examining their performance in vivo circumstances is recommended.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".