MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From Bits and Pieces to Whole Phage to Nanomachines: Pathogen Detection Using Bacteriophages

2017· review· en· W2518774310 on OpenAlexaff
Hany Anany, Ying Chou, Stevan Cucić, Ratmir Derda, Stéphane Evoy, Mansel W. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Food Science and Technology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsAlberta Glycomics CentreUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhage displayComputational biologyBacteriophageBiologyRobustness (evolution)GeneNanotechnologyGeneticsEscherichia coliMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The innate specificity of bacteriophages toward their hosts makes them excellent candidates for the development of detection assays. They can be used in many ways to detect pathogens, and each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Whole bacteriophages can carry reporter genes to alter the phenotype of the target. Bacteriophages can act as staining agents or the progeny of the infection process can be detected, which further increases the sensitivity of the detection assay. Compared with whole-phage particles, use of phage components as probes offers other advantages: for example, smaller probe size to enhance binding activity, phage structures that can be engineered for better affinity, as well as specificity, binding properties, and robustness. When no natural binding with the target exists, phages can be used as vehicles to identify new protein-ligand interactions necessary for diagnostics. This review comprehensively summarizes many uses of phages as detection tools and points the way toward how phage-based technologies may be improved.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Food Science and TechnologySame topicBacteriophages and microbial interactionsFrench-language works237,207