MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901799624 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-34911-9

Access to high-impact mutations constrains the evolution of antibiotic resistance in soft agar

2018· article· en· W2901799624 on OpenAlexafffund
Nour Ghaddar, Mona Hashemidahaj, Brandon Findlay

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersConcordia UniversityGenome Canada
KeywordsAntibioticsAntibiotic resistanceBacteriaMicrobiologyBiologyEscherichia coliMutationMutantGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite widespread resistance to many important antibiotics, the factors that govern the emergence and prevalence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria are still unclear. When exposed to antibiotic gradients in soft agar plates measuring as little as 1.25 × 11 cm we found that Escherichia coli rapidly became resistant to representatives from every class of antibiotics active against Gram-negative bacteria. Evolution kinetics were independent of the frequency of spontaneous mutations that confer antibiotic resistance or antibiotic dose-response curves, and were only loosely correlated to maximal antibiotic concentrations. Instead, rapid evolution required unrealized mutations that could markedly decrease antibiotic susceptibility. When bacteria could not evolve through these "high-impact" mutations, populations frequently bottlenecked, reducing the number of cells from which mutants could arise and prolonging evolution times. This effect was independent of the antibiotic's mechanism of action, and may affect the evolution of antibiotic resistance in clinical settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207