Galactose and Lactose Genes from the Galactose-Positive Bacterium <i>Streptococcus salivarius</i> and the Phylogenetically Related Galactose-Negative Bacterium <i>Streptococcus thermophilus</i> : Organization, Sequence, Transcription, and Activity of the <i>gal</i> Gene Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Streptococcus salivarius is a lactose- and galactose-positive bacterium that is phylogenetically closely related to Streptococcus thermophilus, a bacterium that metabolizes lactose but not galactose. In this paper, we report a comparative characterization of the S. salivarius and S. thermophilus gal-lac gene clusters. The clusters have the same organization with the order galR (codes for a transcriptional regulator and is transcribed in the opposite direction), galK (galactokinase), galT (galactose-1-P uridylyltransferase), galE (UDP-glucose 4-epimerase), galM (galactose mutarotase), lacS (lactose transporter), and lacZ (beta-galactosidase). An analysis of the nucleotide sequence as well as Northern blotting and primer extension experiments revealed the presence of four promoters located upstream from galR, the gal operon, galM, and the lac operon of S. salivarius. Putative promoters with virtually identical nucleotide sequences were found at the same positions in the S. thermophilus gal-lac gene cluster. An additional putative internal promoter at the 3' end of galT was found in S. thermophilus but not in S. salivarius. The results clearly indicated that the gal-lac gene cluster was efficiently transcribed in both species. The Shine-Dalgarno sequences of galT and galE were identical in both species, whereas the ribosome binding site of S. thermophilus galK differed from that of S. salivarius by two nucleotides, suggesting that the S. thermophilus galK gene might be poorly translated. This was confirmed by measurements of enzyme activities.
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 | 0.000 | 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".