MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160337123 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0808657106

Force generation by a dynamic Z-ring in <i>Escherichia coli</i> cell division

2008· article· en· W2160337123 on OpenAlexafffund
Jun Allard, Eric N. Cytrynbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences
KeywordsFtsZCell divisionMotor proteinRing (chemistry)Bacterial cell structureTubulinBiologyBiophysicsCell biologyMicrotubuleCellChemistryBiochemistryBacteriaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FtsZ, a bacterial homologue of tubulin, plays a central role in bacterial cell division. It is the first of many proteins recruited to the division site to form the Z-ring, a dynamic structure that recycles on the time scale of seconds and is required for division to proceed. FtsZ has been recently shown to form rings inside tubular liposomes and to constrict the liposome membrane without the presence of other proteins, particularly molecular motors that appear to be absent from the bacterial proteome. Here, we propose a mathematical model for the dynamic turnover of the Z-ring and for its ability to generate a constriction force. Force generation is assumed to derive from GTP hydrolysis, which is known to induce curvature in FtsZ filaments. We find that this transition to a curved state is capable of generating a sufficient force to drive cell-wall invagination in vivo and can also explain the constriction seen in the in vitro liposome experiments. Our observations resolve the question of how FtsZ might accomplish cell division despite the highly dynamic nature of the Z-ring and the lack of molecular motors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations85
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicBacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyFrench-language works237,207