MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162123770 · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00035-12

Type IV Pilin Proteins: Versatile Molecular Modules

2012· review· en· W2162123770 on OpenAlexafffund
Carmen L. Giltner, Ylan Nguyen, Lori L. Burrows

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiochemical and Structural Characterization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPilinPilusBiologyArchaeaProtein subunitFlagellumComputational biologyDNABacteriaPlasmidSecretionCell biologyGeneticsBiochemistryEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type IV pili (T4P) are multifunctional protein fibers produced on the surfaces of a wide variety of bacteria and archaea. The major subunit of T4P is the type IV pilin, and structurally related proteins are found as components of the type II secretion (T2S) system, where they are called pseudopilins; of DNA uptake/competence systems in both Gram-negative and Gram-positive species; and of flagella, pili, and sugar-binding systems in the archaea. This broad distribution of a single protein family implies both a common evolutionary origin and a highly adaptable functional plan. The type IV pilin is a remarkably versatile architectural module that has been adopted widely for a variety of functions, including motility, attachment to chemically diverse surfaces, electrical conductance, acquisition of DNA, and secretion of a broad range of structurally distinct protein substrates. In this review, we consider recent advances in this research area, from structural revelations to insights into diversity, posttranslational modifications, regulation, and function.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations488
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology and Molecular Biology ReviewsSame topicBiochemical and Structural CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207