Amoeba-resisting bacteria found in multilamellar bodies secreted by<i>Dictyostelium discoideum:</i>social amoebae can also package bacteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many bacteria can resist phagocytic digestion by various protozoa. Some of these bacteria (all human pathogens) are known to be packaged in multilamellar bodies produced in the phagocytic pathway of the protozoa and that are secreted into the extracellular milieu. Packaged bacteria are protected from harsh conditions, and the packaging process is suspected to promote bacterial persistence in the environment. To date, only a limited number of protozoa, belonging to free-living amoebae and ciliates, have been shown to perform bacteria packaging. It is still unknown if social amoebae can do bacteria packaging. The link between the capacity of 136 bacterial isolates to resist the grazing of the social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum and to be packaged by this amoeba was investigated in the present study. The 45 bacterial isolates displaying a resisting phenotype were tested for their capacity to be packaged. A total of seven isolates from Cupriavidus, Micrococcus, Microbacterium and Rathayibacter genera seemed to be packaged and secreted by D. discoideum based on immunofluorescence results. Electron microscopy confirmed that the Cupriavidus and Rathayibacter isolates were formally packaged. These results show that social amoebae can package some bacteria from the environment revealing a new aspect of microbial ecology.
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".