Analogies and homologies in lipopolysaccharide and glycoprotein biosynthesis in bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacteria generate and attach countless glycan structures to diverse macromolecules. Despite this diversity, the mechanisms of glycoconjugate biosynthesis are often surprisingly similar. The focus of this review is on the commonalities between lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and glycoprotein assembly pathways and their evolutionary relationship. Three steps that are essential for both pathways are completed by membrane proteins. These include the initiation of glycan assembly through the attachment of a first sugar residue onto the lipid carrier undecaprenyl pyrophosphate, the translocation across the plasma membrane and the final transfer onto proteins or lipid A-core. Two families of initiating enzymes have been described: the polyprenyl-P N-acetylhexosamine-1-P transferases and the polyprenyl-P hexosamine-1-P transferases, represented by Escherichia coli WecA and Salmonella enterica WbaP, respectively. Translocases are either Wzx-like flippases or adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-binding cassette transporters (ABC transporters). The latter can consist either of two polypeptides, Wzt and Wzm, or of a single polypeptide homolog to the Campylobacter jejuni PglK. Finally, there are two families of conjugating enzymes, the N-oligosaccharyltransferases (N-OTase), best represented by C. jejuni PglB, and the O-OTases, including Neisseria meningitidis PglL and the O antigen ligases involved in LPS biosynthesis. With the exception of the N-OTases, probably restricted to glycoprotein synthesis, members of all these transmembrane protein families can be involved in the synthesis of both glycoproteins and LPS. Because many translocation and conjugation enzymes display relaxed substrate specificity, these bacterial enzymes could be exploited in engineered living bacteria for customized glycoconjugate production, generating potential vaccines and therapeutics.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".