MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169036116 · doi:10.1016/j.femsle.2004.01.038

Distribution and composition of the lysis cassette of<i>Lactococcus lactis</i>phages and functional analysis of bacteriophage ul36 holin

2004· article· en· W2169036116 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Labrie, Nataša Vukov, Martin J. Loessner, Sylvain Moineau

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Microbiology Letters · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLysinLactococcus lactisBacteriophageBiologyLysisAmidaseMicrobiologyPeptidoglycanMolecular biologyGeneGeneticsBacteriaEscherichia coli

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bacteriophage lysis cassette, which comprises a lysin and a holin gene, was analyzed in 18 Lactococcus lactis phages. A muramidase motif was found in the lysins of c2-like phages, while an amidase motif was observed in the lysins of 936-like phages. Both amidase and muramidase types were detected among the P335 phages. The P335 lysins were separated into three groups based on amino acid sequence identity. A class I holin was recognized in 936-like and c2-like phages, whereas P335-like phages possess class II holins. The P335 holins were further divided into four groups based on sequence identity. Only the holins of 936-like phages contained putative dual-start motifs. The unusual lysis cassette of the highly virulent P335-like phage ul36 contains a unique holin (orf74B) upstream of a lysin which is present in several other P335-like phages. Using the lambdadelta Sthf system, we demonstrated that gpORF74B induces cell lysis at the same time as lambdadelta Sthf::S105, the effector of lambda lysis. Transcriptional analysis of ul36 lysis cassette showed that first transcripts are detected 35 min after infection of L. lactis cells. The lysis clock of phage ul36 appears to be controlled by the late expression of the holin and lysin genes.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations26
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Microbiology LettersSame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207