Vector promoters used in <i>Klebsiella pneumoniae</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Much effort has been devoted to the metabolic engineering of Klebsiella pneumoniae; however, our knowledge of the actual expression level of promoters used in K. pneumoniae is limited. In this study, the expression levels of three promoters were compared systematically by using the lacZ reporter gene with different carbon sources in K. pneumoniae. The results showed that, although promoters PT5 and Ptac designed for Escherichia coli were functional, PT5 appeared more efficient and the induction/repression ratio of Ptac was decreased extremely in K. pneumoniae. The basal level of Ptac for lacZ expression reached 396.5 U/mg, which was 9.5-fold higher compared with PT5 in LB medium, indicating Ptac can be used as an efficient "constitutive" promoter as well as an efficient induced promoter in K. pneumoniae. In different carbon sources medium, a newly constructed endogenous constitutive Pbud proved to be a stable and weak promoter. On the basis of our data, a set of Pbud and Ptac promoters could meet the broad range (about 1,000 orders of magnitude) of gene expression needed for engineered K. pneumoniae in glycerol-based medium.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".