MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic and structural comparison of linoleate isomerases from selected food-grade bacteria

2010· article· en· W1536526032 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Macouzet, B.H. Lee, Normand Robert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Microbiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacteriaIsomeraseBiologyMicrobiologyCis-trans-IsomerasesFood scienceBiotechnologyPeptidylprolyl isomeraseBiochemistryGeneticsEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To advance the understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the capacity of bifidobacteria and lactic bacteria to convert linoleic acid (LA) into conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) by the linoleate isomerase (LI). METHODS AND RESULTS: The potential LI enzymes of selected Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium and Leuconostoc strains were compared at the genetic, amino acid sequence and functional levels. Genetic analysis was achieved by insertional mutagenesis and hybridization studies using a Lact. reuteri LI probe. Biotransformation studies monitored by gas chromatography showed that Bif. breve is a major CLA producer after the reference Lact. reuteri strain. The putative Bif. breve LI gene was PCR isolated and sequenced. CONCLUSIONS: The putative LI gene identified in this study seems essential for bacterial growth. Comparative studies indicate that the deduced protein is membrane bound and reveal the presence of several highly conserved domains among a wide range of Gram-positive bacteria. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: Given the multiple health benefits of CLA, the capability of some bacteria to convert LA into CLA is of great relevance. Nevertheless, the yields of CLA remain low, and the regulation of the process is far from being understood. A deeper knowledge of this capacity by the genetic studies is revealing the identity of the LI and will eventually contribute to its control.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied MicrobiologySame topicFatty Acid Research and HealthFrench-language works237,207