MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077491098 · doi:10.1586/14787210.5.6.951

Alternative mechanisms of action of cationic antimicrobial peptides on bacteria

2007· review· en· W2077491098 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

VenueExpert Review of Anti-infective Therapy · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntimicrobialAntimicrobial peptidesMode of actionBacteriaMechanism of actionAntibioticsChemistryIntracellularBiologyComputational biologyMicrobiologyBiochemistryIn vitroGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cationic antimicrobial peptides are a novel type of antibiotic offering much potential in the treatment of microbial-related diseases. They offer many advantages for commercial development, including a broad spectrum of action and modest size. However, despite the identification or synthetic production of thousands of such peptides, the mode of action remains elusive, except for a few examples. While the dogma for the mechanism of action of antimicrobial peptides against bacteria is believed to be through pore formation or membrane barrier disruption, some peptides clearly act differently and other intracellular target sites have been identified. This article presents an updated review of how cationic antimicrobial peptides are able to affect bacterial killing, with a focus on internal targets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.314 · 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