MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968769252 · doi:10.1016/s0378-1097(03)00820-6

Allelic exchange in<i>Francisella tularensis</i>using PCR products

2003· article· en· W1968769252 on OpenAlexaff
Crystal M. Lauriano, Jeffrey R. Barker, Francis E. Nano, Bernard P. Arulanandam, Karl E. Klose

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Microbiology Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacillus and Francisella bacterial research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsFrancisella tularensisBiologyMutantGeneFrancisellaPolymerase chain reactionGeneticsMicrobiologyAmpicillinBacteriaVirulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe here a technique for allelic exchange in Francisella tularensis subsp. novicida utilizing polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products. Linear PCR fragments containing gene deletions with an erythromycin resistance cassette insertion were transformed into F. tularensis. The subsequent ErmR progeny were found to have undergone allelic exchange at the correct location in the genome; the minimum flanking homology necessary was 500 bp. This technique was used to create mglA, iglC, bla, and tul4 mutants in F. tularensis subsp. novicida strains. The mglA and iglC mutants were defective for intramacrophage growth, and the tul4 mutant lacked detectable Tul4 by Western immunoblot, as expected. Interestingly, the bla mutant maintained resistance to ampicillin, indicating the presence of multiple ampicillin resistance genes in F. tularensis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations93
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Microbiology LettersSame topicBacillus and Francisella bacterial researchFrench-language works237,207