MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002871408 · doi:10.1016/j.femsre.2004.05.001

Lipopolysaccharides of anaerobic beer spoilage bacteria of the genus<i>Pectinatus</i>– lipopolysaccharides of a Gram-positive genus

2004· review· en· W2002871408 on OpenAlexaff
Ilkka M. Helander, Auli Haikara, Irina Sadovskaya, Evgeny Vinogradov, Mirja Salkinoja‐Salonen

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Microbiology Reviews · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyClostridialesBacteriaAnaerobic bacteriaFirmicutesClostridiaMicrobiologyPhylumGenusBacterial outer membraneFood spoilageClostridiumBotanyBiochemistry16S ribosomal RNAEscherichia coliGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacteria of the genus Pectinatus emerged during the seventies as contaminants and spoilage organisms in packaged beer. This genus comprises two species, Pectinatus cerevisiiphilus and Pectinatus frisingensis; both are strict anaerobes. On the basis of genomic properties the genus is placed among low GC Gram-positive bacteria (phylum Firmicutes, class Clostridia, order Clostridiales, family Acidaminococcaceae). Despite this assignment, Pectinatus bacteria possess an outer membrane and lipopolysaccharide (LPS) typical of Gram-negative bacteria. The present review compiles the structural and compositional studies performed on Pectinatus LPS. These lipopolysaccharides exhibit extensive heterogeneity, i.e. several macromolecularly and structurally distinct LPS molecules are produced by each strain. Whereas heterogeneity is a common property in lipopolysaccharides, Pectinatus LPS have been shown to contain exceptional carbohydrate structures, consisting of a fairly conserved core region that carries a large non-repetitive saccharide that probably replaces the O-specific chain. Such structures represent a novel architectural principle of the LPS molecule.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Microbiology ReviewsSame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207