MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046861479 · doi:10.4161/viru.24498

Importance of prophages to evolution and virulence of bacterial pathogens

2013· review· en· W2046861479 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVirulence · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirulenceBiologyProphageMicrobiologyPathogenGeneticsVirologyBacteriophageEscherichia coliGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacteriophages, or simply phages, are viruses infecting bacteria. With an estimated 10 ( 31) particles in the biosphere, phages outnumber bacteria by a factor of at least 10 and not surprisingly, they influence the evolution of most bacterial species, sometimes in unexpected ways. "Temperate" phages have the ability to integrate into the chromosome of their host upon infection, where they can reside as "quiescent" prophages until conditions favor their reactivation. Lysogenic conversion resulting from the integration of prophages encoding powerful toxins is probably the most determinant contribution of prophages to the evolution of pathogenic bacteria. We currently grasp only a small fraction of the total phage diversity. Phage biologists keep unraveling novel mechanisms developed by phages to parasitize their host. The purpose of this review is to give an overview of some of the various ways by which prophages change the lifestyle and boost virulence of some of the most dangerous bacterial pathogens.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.259 · 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