MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319901721 · doi:10.1139/cjm-2013-0343

Friend or foe? A review of the mechanisms that drive<i>Serratia</i>towards diverse lifestyles

2013· review· en· W2319901721 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lauren Petersen, Louis S. Tisa

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSerratiaBacteriaBiologySerratia marcescensMicroorganismThrivingMicrobiologyEcologyOrganismNichePseudomonasBiochemistryEscherichia coliGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Found widespread around the globe, Serratia are Gram-negative bacteria capable of thriving in a diverse number of environments that include water, soil, and the digestive tracts of various animals. Known for their ability to produce a myriad of extracellular enzymes, these bacteria also produce various secondary metabolites that directly contribute to their survival. While the effects Serratia species have on other organisms range from parasitic to symbiotic, what these bacteria have in common is their ability to resist attack, respond appropriately to environmental conditions, and outcompete other microorganisms when colonizing their respective niche. This review highlights the mechanisms utilized by Serratia species that drive their ubiquitous nature, with emphasis on the latest findings. Also discussed is how secreted compounds drive these bacteria towards pathogenic, mutualistic, and antagonistic associations.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations133
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207