MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2024684219 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0114613

Type-IV Pilus Deformation Can Explain Retraction Behavior

2014· article· en· W2024684219 on OpenAlexaff
Ranajay Ghosh, Aloke Kumar, Ashkan Vaziri

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsElongationStall (fluid mechanics)Protein filamentBiophysicsPilusChemistryElasticity (physics)Materials scienceMechanicsPhysicsUltimate tensile strengthComposite materialBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymeric filament like type IV Pilus (TFP) can transfer forces in excess of 100 pN during their retraction before stalling, powering surface translocation(twitching). Single TFP level experiments have shown remarkable nonlinearity in the retraction behavior influenced by the external load as well as levels of PilT molecular motor protein. This includes reversal of motion near stall forces when the concentration of the PilT protein is loweblack significantly. In order to explain this behavior, we analyze the coupling of TFP elasticity and interfacial behavior with PilT kinetics. We model retraction as reaction controlled and elongation as transport controlled process. The reaction rates vary with TFP deformation which is modeled as a compound elastic body consisting of multiple helical strands under axial load. Elongation is controlled by monomer transport which suffer entrapment due to excess PilT in the cell periplasm. Our analysis shows excellent agreement with a host of experimental observations and we present a possible biophysical relevance of model parameters through a mechano-chemical stall force map.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalmedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→