Proteomic analysis of proteins differentially expressed in conidia and mycelium of the entomopathogenic fungus <i>Aschersonia placenta</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The infection of insects by the entomopathogenic fungus Aschersonia placenta depends on conidia. To identify proteins differentially expressed in A. placenta conidia vs mycelia, we performed a comparative proteomic analysis of A. placenta using 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis (2-DE) and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization/time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS). We detected 1022 2-DE protein spots in conidia and 1049 in mycelia and analyzed 48 (13 from conidia and 35 from mycelia) using MALDI-TOF-MS. Finally, we identified 28 proteins (7 from conidia and 21 from mycelia). The identified proteins exclusive to conidia included major proteins participating in oxidation-reduction processes and vegetative insecticidal protein 1 (Vip1), a protein that is likely involved in pathogenicity. The identified proteins exclusive to mycelia were those involved in biosynthesis and metabolism, including uridine diphosphate galactopyranose mutase, which might play key roles in hyphal morphogenesis. This report provides the first proteomic analysis of different developmental stages of an Aschersonia species. Although only a small number of proteins were identified, the data represent a useful foundation for future studies concerning the molecular basis of entomopathogenicity in the species A. placenta and in the genus Aschersonia.
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) | 0.000 | 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".