Characterization of CRISPR‐Cas systems in the <i>Ralstonia solanacearum</i> species complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) are composed of an array of short DNA repeat sequences separated by unique spacer sequences that are flanked by associated ( Cas ) genes. CRISPR‐Cas systems are found in the genomes of several microbes and can act as an adaptive immune mechanism against invading foreign nucleic acids, such as phage genomes. Here, we studied the CRISPR‐Cas systems in plant‐pathogenic bacteria of the Ralstonia solanacearum species complex (RSSC). A CRISPR‐Cas system was found in 31% of RSSC genomes present in public databases. Specifically, CRISPR‐Cas types I‐E and II‐C were found, with I‐E being the most common. The presence of the same CRISPR‐Cas types in distinct Ralstonia phylotypes and species suggests the acquisition of the system by a common ancestor before Ralstonia species segregation. In addition, a Cas1 phylogeny (I‐E type) showed a perfect geographical segregation of phylotypes, supporting an ancient acquisition. Ralstonia solanacearum strains CFBP2957 and K60 T were challenged with a virulent phage, and the CRISPR arrays of bacteriophage‐insensitive mutants (BIMs) were analysed. No new spacer acquisition was detected in the analysed BIMs. The functionality of the CRISPR‐Cas interference step was also tested in R. solanacearum CFBP2957 using a spacer‐protospacer adjacent motif (PAM) delivery system, and no resistance was observed against phage phiAP1. Our results show that the CRISPR‐Cas system in R. solanacearum CFBP2957 is not its primary antiviral strategy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".