Klebsiella pneumoniae O1 and O2ac antigens provide prototypes for an unusual strategy for polysaccharide antigen diversification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A limited range of different structures is observed in O-antigenic polysaccharides (OPSs) from Klebsiella pneumoniae lipopolysaccharides. Among these, several are based on modifications of a conserved core element of serotype O2a OPS, which has a disaccharide repeat structure [→3)-α-d-Gal p -(1→3)-β-d-Gal f -(1→]. Here, we describe the enzymatic pathways for a highly unusual modification strategy involving the attachment of a second glycan repeat-unit structure to the nonreducing terminus of O2a. This occurs by the addition of the O1 [→3)-α-d-Gal p -(1→3)-β-d-Gal p -(1→] or O2c [→3)-β-d-Glc p NAc-(1→5)-β-d-Gal f -(1→] antigens. The organization of the enzyme activities performing these modifications differs, with the enzyme WbbY possessing two glycosyltransferase catalytic sites solely responsible for O1 antigen polymerization and forming a complex with the O2a glycosyltransferase WbbM. In contrast, O2c polymerization requires glycosyltransferases WbmV and WbmW, which interact with one another but apparently not with WbbM. Using defined synthetic acceptors and site-directed mutants to assign the activities of the WbbY catalytic sites, we found that the C-terminal WbbY domain is a UDP-Gal p –dependent GT-A galactosyltransferase adding β-(1→3)–linked d-Gal p , whereas the WbbY N terminus includes a GT-B enzyme adding α-(1→3)–linked d-Gal p . These activities build the O1 antigen on a terminal Gal p in the O2a domain. Using similar approaches, we identified WbmV as the UDP-GlcNAc transferase and noted that WbmW represents a UDP-Gal f –dependent enzyme and that both are GT-A members. WbmVW polymerizes the O2c antigen on a terminal Gal f. Our results provide mechanistic and conceptual insights into an important strategy for polysaccharide antigen diversification in bacteria.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".