Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Gram-negative bacteria, envelope stress responses were originally defined in Escherichia coli based on the discovery of signaling pathways that mediated adaptation to misfolded proteins localized to the outer compartments of the cell. One of these, the Cpx response, was found to be involved in sensing and mediating adaptation to periplasmic misfolded proteins. Genetic, biochemical, and structural approaches have defined a set of signaling proteins consisting of the two-component regulatory system made up of the sensor histidine kinase CpxA and its cognate response regulator CpxR, the periplasmic chaperone-inhibitor CpxP, and the outer membrane lipoprotein NlpE. These proteins regulate the Cpx envelope stress response upon exposure to a large array of envelope perturbations, adhesion, and growth. Adaptation to Cpx-inducing signals is accomplished through multiple means, including the elevated production of chaperones and proteases and the elimination of envelope-spanning and inner membrane protein complexes. Contemporary transcriptomic studies in other Gram-negative microbes suggest that the Cpx response acts predominantly at the inner membrane. In this chapter, we review current research that insinuates a connection between the Cpx inner membrane stress response, efflux, and metal trafficking.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".