BLAST screening of chlamydial genomes to identify signature proteins that are unique for the Chlamydiales, Chlamydiaceae, Chlamydophila and Chlamydia groups of species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chlamydiae species are of much importance from a clinical viewpoint. Their diversity both in terms of their numbers as well as clinical involvement are presently believed to be significantly underestimated. The obligate intracellular nature of chlamydiae has also limited their genetic and biochemical studies. Thus, it is of importance to develop additional means for their identification and characterization. RESULTS: We have carried out analyses of available chlamydiae genomes to identify sets of unique proteins that are either specific for all Chlamydiales genomes, or different Chlamydiaceae family members, or members of the Chlamydia and Chlamydophila genera, or those unique to Protochlamydia amoebophila, but which are not found in any other bacteria. In total, 59 Chlamydiales-specific proteins, 79 Chlamydiaceae-specific proteins, 20 proteins each that are specific for both Chlamydia and Chlamydophila and 445 ORFs that are Protochlamydia-specific were identified. Additionally, 33 cases of possible gene loss or lateral gene transfer were also detected. CONCLUSION: The identified chlamydiae-lineage specific proteins, many of which are highly conserved, provide novel biomarkers that should prove of much value in the diagnosis of these bacteria and in exploration of their prevalence and diversity. These conserved protein sequences (CPSs) also provide novel therapeutic targets for drugs that are specific for these bacteria. Lastly, functional studies on these chlamydiae or chlamydiae subgroup-specific proteins should lead to important insights into lineage-specific adaptations with regards to development, infectivity and pathogenicity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".