Synthetic Promoters Functional in Francisella novicida and Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, we describe the identification of synthetic, controllable promoters that function in the bacterial pathogen Francisella novicida, a model facultative intracellular pathogen. Synthetic DNA fragments consisting of the tetracycline operator (tetO) flanked by a random nucleotide sequence were inserted into a Francisella novicida shuttle plasmid upstream of a promoterless artificial operon containing the reporter genes cat and lacZ. Fragments able to promote transcription were selected for based on their ability to drive expression of the cat gene, conferring chloramphenicol resistance. Promoters of various strengths were found, many of which were repressed in the presence of the tetracycline repressor (TetR) and promoted transcription only in the presence of the TetR inducer anhydrotetracycline. A subset of both constitutive and inducible synthetic promoters were characterized to find their induction ratios and to identify their transcription start sites. In cases where tetO was located between or downstream of the -10 and -35 regions of the promoter, control by TetR was observed. If the tetO region was upstream of the -35 region by more than 9 bp, it did not confer TetR control. We found that three of three promoters isolated in F. novicida functioned at a comparable level in E. coli; however, none of the 10 promoters isolated in E. coli functioned at a significant level in F. novicida. Our results allowed us to isolate minimal F. novicida promoters of 47 and 48 bp in length.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".