Relationship between antibiotic susceptibility and biofilm production in a clinical strain\nof Burkholderia cepacia complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infections caused by Burkholderia cepacia complex in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) are often related to increased mortality. One of the mechanisms that makes the bacteria more resistant to the action of antibiotics is the ability to produce biofilm. It has been compared the antibiotic resistance of two clinical isolates of a biofilm-producing strain called BTS-2, responsible for chronic pulmonary infection in a CF patient. Bacteria were incubated in bothYeast Extract Mannitol Medium (YEM) and Mueller Hinton Broth (MHB) at 30°C for 24 hours. Biofilm was quantified by spectrophotometer readings (OD570) of the extracted crystal violet. By microdilution broth, we evaluated the minimum concentration of antibiotic inhibiting the growth of the planktonic form (MIC); by the technology “Calgary Biofilm Device” and by Resazurin, we evaluated the susceptibility of sessile forms (BIC). Data demonstrate that the microorganism in the course of time changed its sensitivity to some of the antibiotics tested.The comparison between sessile and planktonic forms of BTS2 pre-incubated in MHB showed that sessile forms increased their resistance to antibiotics in a few cases only. BICs of BTS2 pre-incubated in YEM, where the strain produced an amount of biofilm significantly lower than in MHB, showed a higher susceptibility to 4 of the 10 antibiotics tested. Our data showed that the susceptibility of sessile forms of a strain is not always lower than the susceptibility of its planktonic forms and that culture medium can affect significantly the biofilm production.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".