MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bacterial Osmoregulation: A Paradigm for the Study of Cellular Homeostasis

2010· review· en· W2163029786 on OpenAlexaff
Janet M. Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Microbiology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCytoplasmOsmotic shockOsmoregulationHomeostasisBiologyMacromolecular crowdingCell biologyOsmosisProtein foldingOsmoprotectantBiophysicsChemistryBiochemistryMacromoleculeAmino acidMembraneEcologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To thrive, cells must control their own physical and chemical properties. This process is known as cellular homeostasis. The dilute solutions traditionally favored by experimenters do not simulate the cytoplasm, where macromolecular crowding and preferential interactions among constituents may dominate critical processes. Solutions that do simulate cytoplasmic conditions are now being characterized. Corresponding cytoplasmic properties can be varied systematically by imposing osmotic stress. This osmotic stress approach is revealing how cytoplasmic properties modulate protein folding and protein?nucleic acid interactions. Results suggest that cytoplasmic homeostasis may require adjustments to multiple, interwoven cytoplasmic properties. Osmosensory transporters with diverse structures and bioenergetic mechanisms activate in response to osmotic stress as other proteins inactivate. These transporters are serving as paradigms for the study of in vivo protein-solvent interactions. Experimenters have proposed three different osmosensory mechanisms. Distinct mechanisms may exist, or these proposals may reflect different perceptions of a single, unifying mechanism.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations317
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of MicrobiologySame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207