MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095966832 · doi:10.1128/jb.02449-14

The Cpx Envelope Stress Response Modifies Peptidoglycan Cross-Linking via the l,d-Transpeptidase LdtD and the Novel Protein YgaU

2014· article· en· W2095966832 on OpenAlexafffund
Margarita Bernal-Cabas, Juan A. Ayala, Tracy Raivio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bacteriology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyPeptidoglycanCell envelopePeriplasmic spaceGeneRegulonEscherichia coliCell biologyMolecular biologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cpx envelope stress response mediates a complex adaptation to conditions that cause protein misfolding in the periplasm. A recent microarray study demonstrated that Cpx response activation led to changes in the expression of genes known, or predicted, to be involved in cell wall remodeling. We sought to characterize the changes that the cell wall undergoes during activation of the Cpx pathway in Escherichia coli. Luminescent reporters of gene expression confirmed that LdtD, a putative l,d-transpeptidase; YgaU, a protein of unknown function; and Slt, a lytic transglycosylase, are upregulated in response to Cpx-inducing conditions. Phosphorylated CpxR binds to the upstream regions of these genes, which contain putative CpxR binding sites, suggesting that regulation is direct. We show that the activation of the Cpx response causes an increase in the abundance of diaminopimelic acid (DAP)-DAP cross-links that involves LdtD and YgaU. Altogether, our data indicate that changes in peptidoglycan structure are part of the Cpx-mediated adaptation to envelope stress and indicate a role for the uncharacterized gene ygaU in regulating cross-linking.

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)0.002
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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations89
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BacteriologySame topicBacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyFrench-language works237,207