Lipidomics of Candida albicans biofilms reveals phase-dependent production of phospholipid molecular classes and role for lipid rafts in biofilm formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Candida albicans-associated bloodstream infections are linked to the ability of this yeast to form biofilms. In this study, we used lipidomics to compare the lipid profiles of C. albicans biofilms and planktonic cells, in early and mature developmental phases. Our results showed that significant differences exist in lipid composition in both developmental phases. Biofilms contained higher levels of phospholipid and sphingolipids than planktonic cells (nmol per g biomass, P<0.05 for all comparisons). In the early phase, levels of lipid in most classes were significantly higher in biofilms compared to planktonic cells (P≤0.05). The ratio of phosphatidylcholine to phosphatidylethanolamine was lower in biofilms compared to planktonic cells in both early (1.17 vs 2.52, P≤0.001) and late (2.34 vs 3.81, P≤0.001) developmental phases. The unsaturation index of phospholipids decreased with time, with this effect being particularly strong for biofilms. Inhibition of the biosynthetic pathway for sphingolipid [mannosyl diinositolphosphoryl ceramide, M(IP)₂C] by myriocin or aureobasidin A, and disruption of the gene encoding inositolphosphotransferase (Ipt1p), abrogated the ability of C. albicans to form biofilms. The differences in lipid profiles between biofilms and planktonic Candida cells may have important implications for the biology and antifungal resistance of biofilms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".