<scp>Hfq</scp> reduces envelope stress by controlling expression of envelope‐localized proteins and protein complexes in enteropathogenic <scp><i>E</i></scp><i>scherichia coli</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gram-negative bacteria possess several envelope stress responses that detect and respond to damage to this critical cellular compartment. The σ(E) envelope stress response senses the misfolding of outer membrane proteins (OMPs), while the Cpx two-component system is believed to detect the misfolding of periplasmic and inner membrane proteins. Recent studies in several Gram-negative organisms found that deletion of hfq, encoding a small RNA chaperone protein, activates the σ(E) envelope stress response. In this study, we assessed the effects of deleting hfq upon activity of the σ(E) and Cpx responses in non-pathogenic and enteropathogenic (EPEC) strains of Escherichia coli. We found that the σ(E) response was activated in Δhfq mutants of all E. coli strains tested, resulting from the misregulation of OMPs. The Cpx response was activated by loss of hfq in EPEC, but not in E. coli K-12. Cpx pathway activation resulted in part from overexpression of the bundle-forming pilus (BFP) in EPEC Δhfq. We found that Hfq repressed expression of the BFP via PerA, a master regulator of virulence in EPEC. This study shows that Hfq has a more extensive role in regulating the expression of envelope proteins and horizontally acquired virulence genes in E. coli than previously recognized.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".