Systems-level approaches for identifying and analyzing genetic interaction networks in <i>Escherichia coli</i> and extensions to other prokaryotes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular interactions define the functional organization of the cell. Epistatic (genetic, or gene-gene) interactions, one of the most informative and commonly encountered forms of functional relationships, are increasingly being used to map process architecture in model eukaryotic organisms. In particular, 'systems-level' screens in yeast and worm aimed at elucidating genetic interaction networks have led to the generation of models describing the global modular organization of gene products and protein complexes within a cell. However, comparable data for prokaryotic organisms have not been available. Given its ease of growth and genetic manipulation, the Gram-negative bacterium Escherichia coli appears to be an ideal model system for performing comprehensive genome-scale examinations of genetic redundancy in bacteria. In this review, we highlight emerging experimental and computational techniques that have been developed recently to examine functional relationships and redundancy in E. coli at a systems-level, and their potential application to prokaryotes in general. Additionally, we have scanned PubMed abstracts and full-text published articles to manually curate a list of approximately 200 previously reported synthetic sick or lethal genetic interactions in E. coli derived from small-scale experimental studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".