The carbon monoxide‐releasing molecule, corm‐3 (ru(co)<sub>3</sub>cl(glycinate)), targets respiration and oxidases in <i>campylobacter jejuni</i>, generating hydrogen peroxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a classical respiratory inhibitor, but CO-releasing molecules (CO-RMs) have therapeutic value, increasing phagocytosis, and reducing sepsis-induced lethality. CORM-3, Ru(CO)(3) Cl(glycinate), a ruthenium-based carbonyl that liberates CO under physiological conditions, has previously been shown to inhibit bacterial growth and respiration, even at high concentrations of oxygen. Here, we report the effects of CORM-3 on the microaerophilic foodborne pathogen Campylobacter jejuni. Even at CO-RM (i.e., CO) concentrations that exceed dissolved oxygen levels, CORM-3 does not inhibit microaerobic growth. This insensitivity is not due to failure of CORM-3 to penetrate cells, as revealed by assay with extracellular myoglobin and by the ability of CO from externally added CORM-3 to bind intracellular membrane-associated respiratory oxidases. Even at almost 200 μ M oxygen, CORM-3 inhibits formate-dependent respiration and leads to generation of hydrogen peroxide. This work shows that CO-RMs have valuable properties as antimicrobial agents; however, growth inhibition does not always accompany inhibition of respiration, even when ambient oxygen concentrations are low.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".