MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797291739 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2018.03.018

Chemical-Chemical Combinations Map Uncharted Interactions in Escherichia coli under Nutrient Stress

2018· article· en· W2797291739 on OpenAlexafffund
Sara S. El Zahed, Eric D. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and Bioproduction
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEscherichia coliGeneHousekeeping geneComputational biologyBiologyGenomeNutrientGenetic codeOrganismChemical biologyAmino acidNucleobaseSynthetic biologyChemistryBiochemistryGeneticsDNAGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of the ?4,400 genes that constitute Escherichia coli's genome, ?300 genes are indispensable for its growth in nutrient-rich conditions. These encode housekeeping functions, including cell wall, DNA, RNA, and protein syntheses. Under conditions in which nutrients are limited to a carbon source, nitrogen source, essential phosphates, and salts, more than 100 additional genes become essential. These largely code for the synthesis of amino acids, vitamins, and nucleobases. Although much is known about this collection of ?400 genes, their interactions under nutrient stress are uncharted. Using a chemical biology approach, we focused on 45 chemical probes targeting encoded proteins in this collection and mapped their interactions under nutrient-limited conditions. Encompassing 990 unique pairwise chemical combinations, we revealed a highly connected network of 186 interactions, of which 81 were synergistic and 105 were antagonistic. The network revealed signature interactions for each probe and highlighted new connectivity between housekeeping functions and those essential in nutrient stress.

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 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicMicrobial Metabolic Engineering and BioproductionFrench-language works237,207