MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081773265 · doi:10.1094/mpmi.2004.17.7.720

Glutamine Utilization by <i>Rhizobium etli</i>

2004· article· en· W2081773265 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rosarita Tatè, Simona Ferraioli, Stefania Filosa, Michele Cermola, Anna Riccio, Maurizio Iaccarino, Eduardo J. Patriarca

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Plant-Microbe Interactions · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsGlutamineBiochemistryBiologyCitric acid cycleMutantAmino acidBacteriaEnergy sourceGeneMetabolismGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We undertook the study of the use of glutamine (Gln) as the source of carbon and energy by Rhizobium etli. Tn5-induced mutagenesis allowed us to identify several genes required for Gln utilization, including those coding for two broad-range amino acid transporters and a glutamate dehydrogenase. The isolated mutants were characterized by the analysis of their capacity i) to grow on different media, ii) to transport Gln (uptake assays), and iii) to utilize Gln as the C energy source (CO2 production from Gln). We show that Gln is degraded through the citric acid cycle and that its utilization as the sole C source is related to a change in the bacterial cell shape (from bacillary to coccoid form) and a high susceptibility to a thiol oxidative insult. Both these data and the analysis of ntr-dependent promoters suggested that Gln-grown bacteria are under a condition of C starvation and N sufficiency, and as expected, the addition of glucose counteracted the morphological change and increased both the bacterial growth rate and their resistance to oxidative stress. Finally, a nodulation analysis indicates that the genes involved in Gln transport and degradation are dispensable for the bacterial ability to induce and invade developing nodules, whereas those involved in gluconeogenesis and nucleotide biosynthesis are strictly required.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Plant-Microbe InteractionsSame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207