MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163136327 · doi:10.1128/iai.01304-10

Lcl of Legionella pneumophila Is an Immunogenic GAG Binding Adhesin That Promotes Interactions with Lung Epithelial Cells and Plays a Crucial Role in Biofilm Formation

2011· article· en· W2163136327 on OpenAlexafffund
Carla Duncan, Akriti Prashar, Jannice So, Patrick Tang, Donald E. Low, Mauricio R. Terebiznik, Cyril Guyard

Bibliographic record

VenueInfection and Immunity · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLegionella and Acanthamoeba research
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLegionella pneumophilaMicrobiologyBacterial adhesinLegionellaBiofilmBiologyBacteriaVirulenceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Legionellosis is mostly caused by Legionella pneumophila and is defined by a severe respiratory illness with a case fatality rate ranging from 5 to 80%. In vitro and in vivo, interactions of L. pneumophila with lung epithelial cells are mediated by the sulfated glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) of the host extracellular matrix. In this study, we have identified several Legionella heparin binding proteins. We have shown that one of these proteins, designated Lcl, is a polymorphic adhesin of L. pneumophila that is produced during legionellosis. Homologues of Lcl are ubiquitous in L. pneumophila serogroups but are undetected in other Legionella species. Recombinant Lcl binds to GAGs, and a Δlpg2644 mutant demonstrated reduced binding to GAGs and human lung epithelial cells. Importantly, we showed that the Δlpg2644 strain is dramatically impaired in biofilm formation. These data delineate the role of Lcl in the GAG binding properties of L. pneumophila and provide molecular evidence regarding its role in L. pneumophila adherence and biofilm formation.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.264
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

Citations61
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfection and ImmunitySame topicLegionella and Acanthamoeba researchFrench-language works237,207