Phosphatidylcholine in membrane of<i>Escherichia coli</i>changes bacterial antigenicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study reports that Escherichia coli phosphatidylcholine-positive (PC+) strain Top10/ptac66 (PC+ PE+), in which borrelial PC synthase (PCS) directly condenses exogenous choline with CDP-diacylglycerol (CDP-DAG) to form PC, displayed not only stronger resistance to antimicrobial peptides cecropin P1 and indolicidin, but also decreased ability to attract macrophages to the abdominal cavity of infected mice in the 36 h following infection, compared with the control strain Top10/ptac85 (PC- PE+). Rabbit sera raised against the PC+ strains Top10/ptac66 (PC+ PE+) and AD93/ptac67 (PC+ PE-) recognized a different set of periplasmic proteins and lipopolysaccharides,compared with those detected by antisera to the PC- strains Top10/ptac85 and AD93 (PC- PE-) . Electron microscopy also showed that the morphology of cell wall of Top10/ptac66 was different from that of the control strain Top10/ptac85. Enhancement of bacterial resistance to antimicrobe peptides, alteration of bacterial antigenicity and evasion of macrophage attacks in mice suggest that PC in the bacterial membrane may play a role in bacterial evasion of the innate or adaptive immune response of the host.
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".