MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008822223 · doi:10.1128/aem.00761-09

Evolution of <i>Lactococcus lactis</i> Phages within a Cheese Factory

2009· article· en· W2008822223 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geneviève M. Rousseau, Sylvain Moineau

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Environmental Microbiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactococcus lactisFactory (object-oriented programming)BiologyMicrobiologyBacteriaFood scienceGeneticsComputer scienceLactic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have sequenced the double-stranded DNA genomes of six lactococcal phages (SL4, CB13, CB14, CB19, CB20, and GR7) from the 936 group that were isolated over a 9-year period from whey samples obtained from a Canadian cheese factory. These six phages infected the same two industrial Lactococcus lactis strains out of 30 tested. The CB14 and GR7 genomes were found to be 100% identical even though they were isolated 14 months apart, indicating that a phage can survive in a cheese plant for more than a year. The other four genomes were related but notably different. The length of the genomes varied from 28,144 to 32,182 bp, and they coded for 51 to 55 open reading frames. All five genomes possessed a 3' overhang cos site that was 11 nucleotides long. Several structural proteins were also identified by nano-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, confirming bioinformatic analyses. Comparative analyses suggested that the most recently isolated phages (CB19 and CB20) were derived, in part, from older phage isolates (CB13 and CB14/GR7). The organization of the five distinct genomes was similar to the previously sequenced lactococcal phage genomes of the 936 group, and from these sequences, a core genome was determined for lactococcal phages of the 936 group.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations80
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Environmental MicrobiologySame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207