MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126694600 · doi:10.1128/jb.01389-07

HasB, the<i>Serratia marcescens</i>TonB Paralog, Is Specific to HasR

2007· article· en· W2126694600 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Najla Benevides-Matos, Cécile Wandersman, Francis Biville

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bacteriology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorInstitut national de la recherche scientifique
KeywordsSerratia marcescensBiologyEscherichia coliReceptorHemeSiderophoreMicrobiologyFunction (biology)Cell biologyBiochemistryGeneEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Serratia marcescens possesses two functional TonB paralogs, TonB(Sm) and HasB, for energizing TonB-dependent transport receptors (TBDT). Previous work had shown that HasB is specific to heme uptake in the natural host and in Escherichia coli expressing the S. marcescens TBDT receptor HasR, whereas the S. marcescens TonB and E. coli TonB proteins function equally well with various TBDT receptors for heme and siderophores. This has raised the question of the target of this specificity. HasB could be specific either to heme TBDT receptors or only to HasR. To resolve this question, we have cloned in E. coli another S. marcescens heme receptor, HemR, and we show here that this receptor is TonB dependent and does not work with HasB. This demonstrates that HasB is not dedicated to heme TBDT receptors but rather forms a specific pair with HasR. This is the first reported case of a specific TonB protein working with only one TBDT receptor in one given species. We discuss the occurrence, possible molecular mechanisms, and selective advantages of such dedicated TonB paralogs.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations34
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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