The Cpx Envelope Stress Response Affects Expression of the Type IV Bundle-Forming Pili of Enteropathogenic<i>Escherichia</i><i>coli</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cpx envelope stress response mediates adaptation to potentially lethal envelope stresses in Escherichia coli. The two-component regulatory system consisting of the sensor kinase CpxA and the response regulator CpxR senses and mediates adaptation to envelope insults believed to result in protein misfolding in this compartment. Recently, a role was demonstrated for the Cpx response in the biogenesis of P pili, attachment organelles expressed by uropathogenic E. coli. CpxA senses misfolded P pilus assembly intermediates and initiates increased expression of both assembly and regulatory factors required for P pilus elaboration. In this report, we demonstrate that the Cpx response is also involved in the expression of the type IV bundle-forming pili of enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC). Bundle-forming pili were not elaborated from an exogenous promoter in E. coli laboratory strain MC4100 unless the Cpx pathway was constitutively activated. Further, an EPEC cpxR mutant synthesized diminished levels of bundle-forming pili and was significantly affected in adherence to epithelial cells. Since type IV bundle-forming pili are very different from chaperone-usher-type P pili in both form and biogenesis, our results suggest that the Cpx envelope stress response plays a general role in the expression of envelope-localized organelles with diverse structures and assembly pathways.
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".