Resistance to β-Lactamase Inhibitor Protein Does Not Parallel Resistance to Clavulanic Acid in TEM β-Lactamase Mutants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to compare patterns of resistance to inhibition by clavulanic acid with patterns of resistance to inhibition by a beta-lactamase inhibitor protein (BLIP), R164S, R244S, and R164S/R244S mutant forms of TEM beta-lactamase were prepared by site-directed mutagenesis. When kinetic parameters were determined for these mutant and wild-type forms of TEM, the single mutants showed properties that were similar to those in the literature but the double mutant showed properties that were very different. The R164S/R244S double mutant form of TEM retained its resistance to inhibition by clavulanic acid (characteristic of the R244S mutation) but lost all its ability to hydrolyze ceftazidime (characteristic of the R164S mutation). While these characteristics are contrary to those previously reported for an R164S/R244S double mutant, this discrepancy resulted from the use of a defective mutant in the earlier study. Both the single and double mutant forms of TEM remained highly sensitive when tested for inhibition by BLIP, showing only slightly increased resistance compared to that of the wild type; this pattern of resistance is quite different from the pattern of clavulanic acid resistance. The slight increases in resistance to inhibition by BLIP seen in the mutants may have been related to the fact that all of the mutations effected changes in the net charge on the TEM protein that could impede interactions with BLIP.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".