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 OpenAlexaff
John Hale, Robert E. W. Hancock

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations551
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Anti-infective TherapySame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207