<i>Anaplasma phagocytophilum</i>Utilizes Multiple Host Evasion Mechanisms To Thwart NADPH Oxidase-Mediated Killing during Neutrophil Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anaplasma phagocytophilum, the etiologic agent of human anaplasmosis, is a bacterial pathogen that specifically colonizes neutrophils. Neutrophils utilize the NADPH oxidase complex to generate superoxide (O(2)(-)) and initiate oxidative killing of microorganisms. A. phagocytophilum's unique tropism for neutrophils, however, indicates that it subverts and/or avoids oxidative killing. We therefore examined the effects of A. phagocytophilum infection on neutrophil NADPH oxidase assembly and reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. Following neutrophil binding, Anaplasma invasion requires at least 240 min. During its prolonged association with the neutrophil plasma membrane, A. phagocytophilum stimulates NADPH oxidase assembly, as indicated by increased cytochrome b(558) mobilization to the membrane, as well as colocalization of Rac and p22(phox). This initial stimulation taxes the host neutrophil's finite oxidase reserves, as demonstrated by time- and bacterial-dose-dependent decreases in secondary activation by N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine (FMLP) or phorbol myristate acetate (PMA). This stimulation is modest, however, and does not diminish oxidase stores to nearly the extent that Escherichia coli, serum-opsonized zymosan, FMLP, or PMA do. Despite the apparent activation of NADPH oxidase, no change in ROS-dependent chemiluminescence is observed upon the addition of A. phagocytophilum to neutrophils, indicating that the bacterium may scavenge exogenous O(2)(-). Indeed, A. phagocytophilum rapidly detoxifies O(2)(-) in a cell-free system. Once internalized, the bacterium resides within a protective vacuole that excludes p22(phox) and gp91(phox). Thus, A. phagocytophilum employs at least two strategies to protect itself from neutrophil NADPH oxidase-mediated killing.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".