Structural and serological studies of the related O‐specific polysaccharides of <i>Proteus vulgaris</i> O21 and <i>Proteus mirabilis</i> O48 having oligosaccharide‐phosphate repeating units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The O-specific polysaccharide chains (O-antigens) of the lipopolysaccharides (LPSs) of Proteus mirabilis O48 and Proteus vulgaris O21 were found to have tetrasaccharide and pentasaccharide repeating units, respectively, interlinked by a glycosidic phosphate. Polysaccharides and an oligosaccharide were derived from the LPSs by various degradation procedures and studied by 1H and 13C NMR spectroscopy, including 2D COSY, TOCSY, NOESY, H-detected 1H,13C and 1H,31P HMQC experiments. The following related structures of the repeating units of the O-antigens were established (top: Proteus mirabilis O48; bottom: Proteus vulgaris O21) The O-specific polysaccharide of P. vulgaris O21 has the same structure as that of Hafnia allvei 744 and PCM 1194 [Petersson C., Jachymek, W., Klonowska, A., Lugowski, C., Niedziela, T. & Kenne, L. (1997) Eur. J. Biochem., 245, 668-675], except that the GlcN residue carries the N-acetyl rather than the N-[(R)-3-hydroxybutyryl] group. Serological investigations confirmed the close relatedness of the Proteus and Hafnia O-antigens studied.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".