Genes of<i>Escherichia coli</i>O157:H7 That Are Involved in High-Pressure Resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seventeen Escherichia coli O157:H7 strains were treated with ultrahigh pressure at 500 MPa and 23 +/- 2 degrees C for 1 min. This treatment inactivated 0.6 to 3.4 log CFU/ml, depending on the strain. The diversity of these strains was confirmed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) analysis, and there was no apparent association between PFGE banding patterns and pressure resistance. The pressure-resistant strain E. coli O157:H7 EC-88 (0.6-log decrease) and the pressure-sensitive strain ATCC 35150 (3.4-log decrease) were treated with a sublethal pressure (100 MPa for 15 min at 23 +/- 2 degrees C) and subjected to DNA microarray analysis using an E. coli K-12 antisense gene chip. High pressure affected the transcription of many genes involved in a variety of intracellular mechanisms of EC-88, including the stress response, the thiol-disulfide redox system, Fe-S cluster assembly, and spontaneous mutation. Twenty-four E. coli isogenic pairs with mutations in the genes regulated by the pressure treatment were treated with lethal pressures at 400 MPa and 23 +/- 2 degrees C for 5 min. The barotolerance of the mutants relative to that of the wild-type strains helped to explain the results obtained by DNA microarray analysis. This study is the first report to demonstrate that the expression of Fe-S cluster assembly proteins and the fumarate nitrate reductase regulator decreases the resistance to pressure, while sigma factor (RpoE), lipoprotein (NlpI), thioredoxin (TrxA), thioredoxin reductase (TrxB), a trehalose synthesis protein (OtsA), and a DNA-binding protein (Dps) promote barotolerance.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".