MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006420907 · doi:10.1016/j.femsle.2005.09.030

From bioremediation to biowarfare: On the impact and mechanism of type IV secretion systems

2005· review· en· W2006420907 on OpenAlexafffund
Christian Baron

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Microbiology Letters · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAntibiotic Resistance in Bacteria
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Innovation Trust
KeywordsSecretionPilusVirulenceChromosomal translocationEffectorMechanism (biology)BiologyCell biologyHorizontal gene transferDNACell envelopeType VI secretion systemExogenous DNAMicrobiologyGeneBiochemistryEscherichia coliGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type IV secretion systems are employed by a wide variety of Gram-negative microorganisms for the translocation of macromolecules across the cell envelope. The translocated substrates (proteins, protein-DNA complexes and DNA) are as diverse as the organisms on the donor and recipient side of the translocation process. Over the course of evolution, these macromolecular transporters were adapted to many different purposes, but their basic mechanism was conserved. They impact human life in various ways, as there are driving forces of horizontal gene transfer, which spreads biodegradative capabilities of environmental bacteria as well as antibiotic resistance of pathogens in hospitals. Also, they translocate toxins and other effectors, which have an effect on host cell metabolism and are essential for the virulence of bacterial pathogens. We here present recent developments of research on the mechanism of type IV secretion focusing on the energetization of transport and assembly processes, formation of the translocation channel and of surface-exposed pili, which initiate host cell interactions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations34
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Microbiology LettersSame topicAntibiotic Resistance in BacteriaFrench-language works237,207