Negative Control of <i>rpoS</i> Expression by Phosphoenolpyruvate:Carbohydrate Phosphotransferase System in <i>Escherichia coli</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sigma(S) (or sigma(38)) subunit of RNA polymerase, encoded by the rpoS gene, is a crucial regulator in the transcriptional control of a set of genes under stressful conditions, such as nutrient starvation. The expression of rpoS is regulated in a complex manner at the levels of transcription, translation, and stability of the product. Although a number of factors involved in the regulation of rpoS expression have been identified, the underlying molecular mechanisms are not fully understood. In this study, we identified the Crr (or EIIA(Glc)) protein as a novel factor that plays an important role not only in the transcriptional control but also in the translational control of rpoS expression. Crr is an important component in glucose uptake through the well-characterized phosphoenolpyruvate:carbohydrate phosphotransferase system. The results of a series of genetic analyses revealed that Crr negatively controls rpoS translation and transcription. The observed transcriptional control by Crr appears to be mediated by cyclic AMP. However, it was found that Crr negatively controls rpoS translation rather directly. These results suggest a possible linkage between the control of rpoS expression and carbon metabolism.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".