MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243618291

TOOLS FOR IDENTIFYING FUNCTIONS OF TYPE III SECRETION SYSTEM EFFECTORS FROM SHIGELLA FLEXNERI

2013· article· en· W2243618291 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saima Sidik

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShigella flexneriType three secretion systemEffectorSecretionShigellaType (biology)Computer scienceMicrobiologyBiologyEscherichia coliBacteriaImmunologyGeneticsSalmonellaGeneVirulenceBiochemistryEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shigellae are pathogenic bacteria that cause the disease shigellosis. Two methods for studying secreted effectors encoded by this pathogen’s virulence plasmid are described.\nFirst, protein microarrays were used to identify substrates of an E3 ubiquitin ligase called IpaH7.8. Second, a deletion collection containing mutants for every gene on the virulence plasmid was used in two screens: one to identify mutants that elicit atypical levels of Interleukin-8 (IL-8) from U937 cells, and one to identify mutants that bind the dye Congo red abnormally. \nAlthough protein microarrays were an ineffective tool, the deletion collection proved valuable. Most mutants were less effective at sequestering Congo red than wild-type S. flexneri, although this ability was enhanced in several mutants. Four mutants, ?ospB, ?orf186, ?mxiH and ?mxiK, elicited higher levels of IL-8 from U937 cells than wild type S. flexneri. These results validate the use of the deletion collection as a tool for studying bacterial pathogenesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.148
Teacher spread0.140 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicRemote Sensing and Land UseFrench-language works237,207