MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A coelectroporation method for the isolation of cryptic plasmids from Lactococcus lactis

2001· article· en· W2076280318 on OpenAlexaff
Nathalie Corneau, Caroline Dubé, Gisèle LaPointe, Éric Émond

Bibliographic record

VenueLetters in Applied Microbiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'AlimentationUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasmidBiologyLactococcus lactisElectroporationMicrobiologyPlasmid preparationGeneticsBacteriaDNAMolecular biologyGenePBR322

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: A coelectroporation method using a marker plasmid for indirect selection of lactococcal plasmids with unassigned functions was evaluated. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cryptic plasmids were mixed with an erythromycin resistance (Eryr) marker plasmid and introduced into a recipient strain by electroporation, followed by plasmid extraction of erythromycin-resistant transformants. By optimizing the ratio between the marker plasmid and the cryptic plasmids, an average of 20% cotransformants was obtained, including combinations of more than one cryptic plasmid. The marker plasmid pSA3 was easily eliminated from the cotransformed cells by subculture without selective pressure. CONCLUSION: This cotransformation approach reduces the number of colonies that must be screened to find transformants harbouring cryptic plasmids. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The method facilitates the isolation of cryptic plasmids, helps in assigning functions to unknown plasmids and allows construction of food-grade lactococcal strains with new combinations of wild-type plasmids.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLetters in Applied MicrobiologySame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207