Roles of orf60a and orf61 in Development of Bacteriophages λ and Φ24B
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The exo-xis region of lambdoid bacteriophage genomes contains several established and potential genes that are evolutionarily conserved, but not essential for phage propagation under laboratory conditions. Nevertheless, deletion or overexpression of either the whole exo-xis region and important regulatory elements can significantly influence the regulation of phage development. This report defines specific roles for orf60a and orf61 in bacteriophage λ and Φ24B, a specific Shiga toxin-converting phage with clinical relevance. We observed that mutant phages bearing deletions of orf60a and orf61 impaired two central aspects of phage development: the lysis-versus-lysogenization decision and prophage induction. These effects were more pronounced for phage Φ24B than for λ. Surprisingly, adsorption of phage Φ24B on Escherichia coli host cells was less efficient in the absence of either orf60a or orf61. We conclude that these open reading frames (ORFs) play important, but not essential, roles in the regulation of lambdoid phage development. Although phages can propagate without these ORFs in nutrient media, we suggest that they may be involved in the regulatory network, ensuring optimization of phage development under various environmental conditions.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".