The natural furanone ( <i>5Z</i> )‐4‐bromo‐5‐(bromomethylene)‐3‐butyl‐2( <i>5H</i> )‐furanone disrupts quorum sensing‐regulated gene expression in <i>Vibrio harveyi</i> by decreasing the DNA‐binding activity of the transcriptional regulator protein luxR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed at getting a deeper insight in the molecular mechanism by which the natural furanone (5Z)-4-bromo-5-(bromomethylene)-3-butyl-2(5H)-furanone disrupts quorum sensing in Vibrio harveyi. Bioluminescence experiments with signal molecule receptor double mutants revealed that the furanone blocks all three channels of the V. harveyi quorum sensing system. In further experiments using mutants with mutations in the quorum sensing signal transduction pathway, the compound was found to block quorum sensing-regulated bioluminescence by interacting with a component located downstream of the Hfq protein. Furthermore, reverse transcriptase real-time polymerase chain reaction with specific primers showed that there was no effect of the furanone on luxR(Vh) mRNA levels in wild-type V. harveyi cells. In contrast, mobility shift assays showed that in the presence of the furanone, significantly lower levels of the LuxR(Vh) response regulator protein were able to bind to its target promoter sequences in wild-type V. harveyi. Finally, tests with purified LuxR(Vh) protein also showed less shifts with furanone-treated LuxR(Vh), whereas the LuxR(Vh) concentration was found not to be altered by the furanone (as determined by SDS-PAGE). Therefore, our data indicate that the furanone blocks quorum sensing in V. harveyi by rendering the quorum sensing master regulator protein LuxR(Vh) unable to bind to the promoter sequences of quorum sensing-regulated genes.
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 | 0.000 | 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".