Cloning and Transplantation of the <i>Mesoplasma florum</i> Genome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloning and transplantation of bacterial genomes is a powerful method for the creation of engineered microorganisms. However, much remains to be understood about the molecular mechanisms and limitations of this approach. We report the whole-genome cloning of Mesoplasma florum in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, and use this model to investigate the impact of a bacterial chromosome in yeast cells. Our results indicate that the cloned M. florum genome is subjected to weak transcriptional activity, and causes no significant impact on yeast growth. We also report that the M. florum genome can be transplanted into Mycoplasma capricolum without any negative impact from the putative restriction enzyme encoding gene mfl307. Using whole-genome sequencing, we observed that a small number of mutations appeared in all M. florum transplants. Mutations also arose, albeit at a lower frequency, when the M. capricolum genome was transplanted into M. capricolum recipient cells. These observations suggest that genome transplantation is mutagenic, and that this phenomenon is magnified by the use of genome donor and recipient cell belonging to different species. No difference in efficiency was detected after three successive rounds of genome transplantation, suggesting that the observed mutations were not selected during the procedure. Taken together, our results provide a more accurate picture of the events taking place during bacterial genome cloning and transplantation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it