Sequencing of CJIE1 prophages from <i>Campylobacter jejuni</i> isolates reveals the presence of inserted and (or) deleted genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacteriophages capable of integrating into host bacterial genomes as prophages affect the biology and virulence of their bacterial hosts. Previously, partial sequencing of 12 prophages similar to CJIE1 from Campylobacter jejuni RM1221 did not show the presence of inserted nonphage genes. Therefore, four of these prophages were sequenced completely, and indels were found in at least two different regions of the prophage genome. Putative proteins from one indel appeared to be members of two new families of proteins, with proteins within each family related to each other by a common domain. Further heterogeneity was found adjacent to the CJE0270 homolog, creating difficulty locating the end of the prophage on this side and in determining the composition of the core prophage. These prophages appear to comprise a family that has heterogeneity in gene content resulting from insertion or deletion of additional genes at three locations in their genomes. In addition, members of the CJIE1 phage family may differ somewhat in their biology from phage Mu. Further investigations of these Campylobacter prophages can be expected to provide interesting insights into the biology of the phages themselves and into the role of these phages in the biology of their hosts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".