Structure, Adsorption to Host, and Infection Mechanism of Virulent Lactococcal Phage p2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lactococcal siphophages from the 936 and P335 groups infect the Gram-positive bacterium Lactococcus lactis using receptor binding proteins (RBPs) attached to their baseplate, a large multiprotein complex at the distal part of the tail. We have previously reported the crystal and electron microscopy (EM) structures of the baseplates of phages p2 (936 group) and TP901-1 (P335 group) as well as the full EM structure of the TP901-1 virion. Here, we report the complete EM structure of siphophage p2, including its capsid, connector complex, tail, and baseplate. Furthermore, we show that the p2 tail is characterized by the presence of protruding decorations, which are related to adhesins and are likely contributed by the major tail protein C-terminal domains. This feature is reminiscent of the tail of Escherichia coli phage λ and Bacillus subtilis phage SPP1 and might point to a common mechanism for establishing initial interactions with their bacterial hosts. Comparative analyses showed that the architecture of the phage p2 baseplate differs largely from that of lactococcal phage TP901-1. We quantified the interaction of its RBP with the saccharidic receptor and determined that specificity is due to lower k(off) values of the RBP/saccharidic dissociation. Taken together, these results suggest that the infection of L. lactis strains by phage p2 is a multistep process that involves reversible attachment, followed by baseplate activation, specific attachment of the RBPs to the saccharidic receptor, and DNA ejection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".