Transcriptional induction of the conserved alternative sigma factor RpoS in <i>Escherichia coli</i> is dependent on BarA, a probable two‐component regulator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The stationary phase expression of many conserved, adaptive bacterial proteins is dependent on RpoS, a second vegetative sigma factor. The regulation of RpoS itself, however, is complex and not fully understood, particularly at the level of transcription. In this report, we show that the observed hydrogen peroxide sensitivity of a mutant defective in expression of barA, a bacterial virulence factor, can be explained by a reduction in catalase activity, an RpoS-controlled function. Levels of katE mRNA, encoding the major catalase of Escherichia coli, were much lower in the barA mutant, suggesting that BarA is required for the expression of this RpoS-regulated gene. Expression of another RpoS-regulated gene, osmY, was also found to be severely reduced in the barA mutant. Employing Western analyses with anti-RpoS antisera and Northern analyses using probes specific for rpoS, we found that BarA is required for the exponential phase induction of RpoS itself. Operon lacZ fusion expression studies and Northern analyses indicate that BarA itself is maximally expressed in early exponential phase cultures immediately preceding the transcriptional induction of RpoS. Results of primer extension studies indicate that exponential phase expression from the rpoSp1 promoter is reduced by more than 85% in a barA mutant but could be efficiently complemented by a plasmid-borne copy of barA in trans. These results suggest that regulatory signals that are operant in exponentially growing cultures play an important role in effecting stationary phase gene expression.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".