MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101051206 · doi:10.1099/mic.0.038794-0

Quorum sensing in bacterial virulence

2010· review· en· W2101051206 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsVirulenceQuorum sensingMicrobiologyBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacteria communicate through the production of diffusible signal molecules termed autoinducers. The molecules are produced at basal levels and accumulate during growth. Once a critical concentration has been reached, autoinducers can activate or repress a number of target genes. Because the control of gene expression by autoinducers is cell-density-dependent, this phenomenon has been called quorum sensing. Quorum sensing controls virulence gene expression in numerous micro-organisms. In some cases, this phenomenon has proven relevant for bacterial virulence in vivo. In this article, we provide a few examples to illustrate how quorum sensing can act to control bacterial virulence in a multitude of ways. Several classes of autoinducers have been described to date and we present examples of how each of the major types of autoinducer can be involved in bacterial virulence. As quorum sensing controls virulence, it has been considered an attractive target for the development of new therapeutic strategies. We discuss some of the new strategies to combat bacterial virulence based on the inhibition of bacterial quorum sensing systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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