MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775306188 · doi:10.14279/depositonce-6519

Production of extracellular DNA (eDNA) of the γ-Proteobacterium Rheinheimera sp. F8 in biofilms

2017· dissertation· en· W2775306188 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDepositOnce · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicBacteriophages and microbial interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofilmMicrobiologyExtracellularBiologyExtracellular polymeric substanceGeneticsChemistryBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract F8 is a gram-negative γ-Proteobacterium, which belongs to the genus Rheinheimera. The strain has been isolated from the South Saskatchewan River in Canada (Böckelmann, 2002). It has been discovered in previous studies that F8 releases DNA into the extracellular space (Böckelmann et al., 2006; Böckelmann et al., 2007). The aim of this study was a more detailed analysis of the F8 extracellular DNA (eDNA), whereby a main focus was placed on the analysis of F8 biofilms from continuous flow reactors and their visualization with different microscopical methods. For this purpose, two different systems were adapted and employed: a continuous flow reactor and a flow cell, which were operated with oligotrophic freshwater basal medium. Biofilm architecture was visualized by fluorescence microscopy, confocal laser scanning microscopy, scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. Cell numbers in the continuous flow reactor were monitored by flow cytometry and by the drop plate method. eDNA under continuous flow conditions could be detected over the whole time course analyzed (1-21 days) and it was found to be integrated in different ways into the biofilm. It was shown that eDNA develops different morphological structures: it occured as an amorphous mass, but it also formed typical filaments and net-like structures. The results suggested different roles for eDNA in F8-biofilms. Due to its adhesive properties it may facilitate the formation of a characteristic biofilm architecture (e.g. by facilitating microcolony formation). It was observed, that the formation of filaments and nets is especially pronounced under highly nutrient-limited conditions. This indicates that eDNA may confer advantages to the bacteria by improving nutrient access: either by capturing nutrients or by serving as a nutrient source itself. Furthermore, it has been shown by LIVE/DEAD Baclight staining that the vast majority of cells in the biofilms displayed green fluorescent signals and almost all of them were closely associated with small clouds of eDNA. This indicates that F8 cells excrete eDNA (also) by a lysis-independent mechanism. A draft sequence of the F8 genome was determined de novo by shot gun-sequencing and the genome was annotated with the RAST server. These data build an important base for the further elucidation of eDNA-production, -excretion and -utilization in F8 biofilms. In the final assembly of the draft genome, a 4,464,511-bp sequence was generated. 3,970 protein coding sequences, 9 genes for rRNAs (including 3 versions for 16S rRNA) and 83 genes for tRNAs were found. The G+C content is 51.8 %.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · 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