Late-Stage Polyribitol Phosphate Wall Teichoic Acid Biosynthesis in <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wall teichoic acids are cell wall polymers that maintain the integrity of the cellular envelope and contribute to the virulence of Staphylococcus aureus. Despite the central role of wall teichoic acid in S. aureus virulence, details concerning the biosynthetic pathway of the predominant wall teichoic acid polymer are lacking, and workers have relied on a presumed similarity to the putative polyribitol phosphate wall teichoic acid pathway in Bacillus subtilis. Using high-resolution polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis for analysis of wall teichoic acid extracted from gene deletion mutants, a revised assembly pathway for the late-stage ribitol phosphate-utilizing enzymes is proposed. Complementation studies show that a putative ribitol phosphate polymerase, TarL, catalyzes both the addition of the priming ribitol phosphate onto the linkage unit and the subsequent polymerization of the polyribitol chain. It is known that the putative ribitol primase, TarK, is also a bifunctional enzyme that catalyzes both ribitol phosphate priming and polymerization. TarK directs the synthesis of a second, electrophoretically distinct polyribitol-containing teichoic acid that we designate K-WTA. The biosynthesis of K-WTA in S. aureus strain NCTC8325 is repressed by the accessory gene regulator (agr) system. The demonstration of regulated wall teichoic acid biosynthesis has implications for cell envelope remodeling in relation to S. aureus adhesion and pathogenesis.
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) | 0.000 | 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".