MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985984976 · doi:10.4161/bact.26649

Identification and characterization of ϕH111-1

2013· article· en· W1985984976 on OpenAlexafffund
Karlene H. Lynch, Yongjie Liang, Leo Eberl, David S. Wishart, Jonathan J. Dennis

Bibliographic record

VenueBacteriophage · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for NanotechnologyUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDirectorate for Biological SciencesCystic Fibrosis Canada
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Computer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterization of prophages in sequenced bacterial genomes is important for virulence assessment, evolutionary analysis, and phage application development. The objective of this study was to identify complete, inducible prophages in the cystic fibrosis (CF) clinical isolate Burkholderia cenocepacia H111. Using the prophage-finding program PHAge Search Tool (PHAST), we identified three putative intact prophages in the H111 sequence. Virions were readily isolated from H111 culture supernatants following extended incubation. Using shotgun cloning and sequencing, one of these virions (designated ϕH111-1 [vB_BceM_ϕH111-1]) was identified as the infective particle of a PHAST-detected intact prophage. ϕH111-1 has an extremely broad host range with respect to B. cenocepacia strains and is predicted to use lipopolysaccharide (LPS) as a receptor. Bioinformatics analysis indicates that the prophage is 42,972 base pairs in length, encodes 54 proteins, and shows relatedness to the virion morphogenesis modules of AcaML1 and “Vhmllikevirus” myoviruses. As ϕH111-1 is active against a broad panel of clinical strains and encodes no putative virulence factors, it may be therapeutically effective for Burkholderia infections.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBacteriophageSame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207