MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988230764 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3301

Experimental evolution of resistance to an antimicrobial peptide

2005· article· en· W1988230764 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel G. Perron, Michael Zasloff, Graham Bell

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntimicrobialAntimicrobial peptidesBiologyMagaininAntibiotic resistancePseudomonas fluorescensEscherichia coliAntibioticsExperimental evolutionSelection (genetic algorithm)PopulationPeptideMicrobiologyGeneticsMulticellular organismComputational biologyBacteriaCellGeneBiochemistryMedicineArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel class of antibiotics based on the antimicrobial properties of immune peptides of multicellular organisms is attracting increasing interest as a major weapon against resistant microbes. It has been claimed that cationic antimicrobial peptides exploit fundamental features of the bacterial cell so that resistance is much less likely to evolve than in the case of conventional antibiotics. Population models of the evolutionary genetics of resistance have cast doubt on this claim. We document the experimental evolution of resistance to a cationic antimicrobial peptide through continued selection in the laboratory. In this selection experiment, 22/24 lineages of Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas fluorescens independently evolved heritable mechanisms of resistance to pexiganan, an analogue of magainin, when propagated in medium supplemented with this antimicrobial peptide for 600-700 generations.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations368
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207