MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990546799 · doi:10.1139/w06-073

Role of the <i>Sulfolobus shibatae</i> viral T6 initiator in conferring promoter strength and in influencing transcription start site selection

2006· article· en· W1990546799 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sohail A. Qureshi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSulfolobusTranscription (linguistics)BiologySelection (genetic algorithm)GeneticsTranscription factorGeneArchaeaComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Archaeal promoters contain a TATA-box, an adjacent upstream TFB-recognition element (BRE), and a downstream initiator (INR) region from which transcription originates. While the contribution of A-box and BRE to promoter strength is well established, the role of DNA sequences within the INR region and its vicinity on transcription efficiency and start site selection remains unclear. Here, I demonstrate using the strong Sulfolobus shibatae viral T6 promoter that either substitution of its natural sequence from -17 and beyond with plasmid DNA or introduction of point transversion mutations at +3, -2, -4, and -5 positions reduce promoter strength dramatically, whereas +1, -1, and -2 mutations influence the transcription start site. These data therefore reveal that the INR region plays a role as important as the BRE and the A-box in T6 gene transcription.

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)0.000
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
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207