MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139259974 · doi:10.1128/jb.01032-07

<scp>l</scp>-Rhamnose Transport Is Sugar Kinase (RhaK) Dependent in<i>Rhizobium leguminosarum</i>bv. trifolii

2007· article· en· W2139259974 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason S. Richardson, Ivan J. Oresnik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bacteriology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRhamnoseBiologyRhizobium leguminosarumOperonGene clusterBiochemistryCatabolismKinaseGeneBacteriaGeneticsRhizobiaceaeEscherichia coliPolysaccharideEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strains of Rhizobium leguminosarum which are unable to catabolize l-rhamnose, a methyl-pentose sugar, are compromised in the ability to compete for nodule occupancy versus wild-type strains. Previous characterization of the 11-kb region necessary for the utilization of rhamnose identified a locus carrying catabolic genes and genes encoding the components of an ABC transporter. Genetic evidence suggested that the putative kinase RhaK carried out the first step in the catabolism of rhamnose. Characterization of this kinase led to the observation that strains carrying rhamnose kinase mutations were unable to transport rhamnose into the cell. The absence of a functional rhamnose kinase did not stop the transcription and translation of the ABC transporter components. By developing an in vitro assay for RhaK activity, we have been able to show that (i) RhaK activity is consistent with RhaK phosphorylating rhamnose and (ii) biochemical activity of RhaK is necessary for rhamnose transport.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BacteriologySame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207