MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149321282 · doi:10.1099/jmm.0.47282-0

Differential binding of Shiga toxin 2 to human and murine neutrophils

2007· article· en· W2149321282 on OpenAlexafffund
Thomas P. Griener, George L. Mulvey, Paola Marcato, Glen D. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Microbiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEscherichia coli research studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsShiga toxinSTX2GlobotriaosylceramidePentamerMicrobiologyEscherichia coliShiga-like toxinToxinBiologyBinding siteProtein subunitMolecular biologyChemistryBiochemistryMedicineGenePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shiga toxins (Stx1 and Stx2) are responsible for initiating haemolytic uraemic syndrome, a serious extraintestinal complication caused by enterohaemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157 : H7 infection in humans. Shiga toxins are classical AB(5)-type exotoxins, consisting of a globotriaosylceramide (Gb(3))-binding B subunit pentamer and an enzymic A subunit. It is demonstrated in this study that Stx2 binds to human neutrophils by a non-classical mechanism that is independent of Gb(3). In contrast, the investigation revealed that Stx2 binds to murine neutrophils by the classical Gb(3)-dependent mechanism. Moreover, whereas the human serum amyloid P (HuSAP) component inhibited Stx2 binding to murine neutrophils, HuSAP increased Stx2 binding to human neutrophils by 84.2 % (P< or =0.002, Student's t-test). These observations may explain why HuSAP protects mice from the lethal effects of Stx2, whereas there is no indication that HuSAP plays a similar protective role in humans infected by E. coli O157 : H7.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations42
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical MicrobiologySame topicEscherichia coli research studiesFrench-language works237,207