Locus of Enterocyte Effacement from <i>Citrobacter rodentium</i> : Sequence Analysis and Evidence for Horizontal Transfer among Attaching and Effacing Pathogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family of attaching and effacing (A/E) bacterial pathogens, which includes diarrheagenic enteropathogenic Escherichia coli (EPEC) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC), remains a significant threat to human and animal health. These bacteria intimately attach to host intestinal cells, causing the effacement of brush border microvilli. The genes responsible for this phenotype are encoded in a pathogenicity island called the locus of enterocyte effacement (LEE). Citrobacter rodentium is the only known murine A/E pathogen and serves as a small animal model for EPEC and EHEC infections. Here we report the full DNA sequence of C. rodentium LEE and provide a comparative analysis with the published LEEs from EPEC, EHEC, and the rabbit diarrheagenic E. coli strain RDEC-1. Although C. rodentium LEE shows high similarities throughout the entire sequence and shares all 41 open reading frames with the LEE from EPEC, EHEC, and RDEC-1, it is unique in its location of the rorf1 and rorf2/espG genes and the presence of several insertion sequences (IS) and IS remnants. The LEE of EPEC and EHEC is inserted into the selC tRNA gene. In contrast, the Citrobacter LEE is flanked on one side by an operon encoding an ABC transport system, and an IS element and sequences homologous to Shigella plasmid R100 and EHEC pO157 flank the other. The presence of plasmid sequences next to C. rodentium LEE suggests that the prototype LEE resided on a horizontally transferable plasmid. Additional sequence analysis reveals that the 3-kb plasmid in C. rodentium is nearly identical to p9705 in EHEC O157:H7, suggesting that horizontal plasmid transfer among A/E pathogens has occurred. Our results indicate that the LEE has been acquired by C. rodentium and A/E E. coli strains independently during evolution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".