Genomic Comparison of PE and PPE Genes in the<i>Mycobacterium avium</i>Complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) comprises genomically similar but phenotypically divergent bacteria that inhabit diverse environments and that cause disease in different hosts. In this study, a whole-genome approach was used to examine the polymorphic PE (Pro-Glu) and PPE (Pro-Pro-Glu) gene families, implicated in immunostimulation and virulence. The four major groups of MAC organisms were examined, including the newly sequenced type strains of M. intracellulare and M. avium subsp. avium, plus M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis and M. avium subsp. hominissuis, for the purpose of finding genetic differences that could be exploited to design diagnostic tests specific to these groups and that could help explain their divergence in pathogenesis and host specificity. Unique and missing PPE genes were found in all MAC members except M. avium subsp. avium. Only M. intracellulare had a unique PE gene. Apart from this, most PE and PPE sequences were conserved, with average nucleotide sequence identities of 99.1 and 98.1%, respectively, among the M. avium subspecies, but only 82.9 and 79.7% identities with the PE and PPE sequences of M. intracellulare, respectively. A detailed analysis of the amino acid sequences was performed between M. avium subsp. paratuberculosis and M. avium subsp. hominissuis. Most differences were detected in the PPE proteins, with amino acid substitutions and frame shifts leading to unique amino acid sequences. In conclusion, several unique PPE proteins were identified in MAC organisms next to numerous polymorphisms in both the PE and PPE gene families. These substantial differences could help explain the divergence in phenotypes within the MAC and could lead to diagnostic tests with better discriminatory abilities.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".