Competitive Fitness of Listeria monocytogenes Serotype 1/2a and 4b Strains in Mixed Cultures with and without Food in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Enrichment Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirteen different serotypes of the food-borne pathogen Listeria monocytogenes have been described. Serotype 4b strains are most often associated with illness, and serotype 1/2a strains are most often isolated from foods and processing plants. Different abilities to respond to stresses have been described for serotype 4b and 1/2a strains. One of the common enrichment protocols used to test foods for the presence L. monocytogenes is described in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Bacterial Analytical Manual (BAM). We compared three strains of L. monocytogenes serotype 4b and five strains of serotype 1/2a in direct competition with each other in two-strain mixed cultures by using the FDA BAM enrichment protocol, which includes both enrichment broth and selective agar, with and without added food to mimic the conditions that occur during attempts to isolate Listeria species from contaminated foods. Using a colony immunoblot procedure and analyzing over 112,000 colonies, we observed differences in strain fitness, but these differences were not attributable to serotype or genetic lineage.
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".