A Division of Labor in the Recruitment and Topological Organization of a Bacterial Morphogenic Complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Bacteria come in an array of shapes and sizes, but the mechanisms underlying diverse morphologies are poorly understood. The peptidoglycan (PG) cell wall is the primary determinant of cell shape. At the molecular level, morphological variation often results from the regulation of enzymes involved in cell elongation and division. These enzymes are spatially controlled by cytoskeletal scaffolding proteins, that both recruit and organize the PG synthesis complex. How then do cells define alternative morphogenic processes that are distinct from cell elongation and division? To address this, we have turned to the specific morphotype of Alphaproteobacterial stalks. Stalk synthesis is a specialized form of zonal growth, which requires PG synthesis in a spatially constrained zone to extend a thin cylindrical projection of the cell envelope. The morphogen SpmX defines the site of stalk PG synthesis, but SpmX is a PG hydrolase. How then does a non-cytoskeletal protein, SpmX, define and constrain PG synthesis to form stalks? Here we report that SpmX and the bactofilin BacA act in concert to regulate stalk synthesis in Asticcacaulis biprosthecum . We show that SpmX recruits BacA to the site of stalk synthesis. BacA then serves as a stalk-specific topological organizer for PG synthesis activity, including its recruiter SpmX, at the base of the stalk. In the absence of BacA, cells produce “pseudostalks” that are the result of unconstrained PG synthesis. Therefore, the protein responsible for recruitment of a morphogenic PG remodeling complex, SpmX, is distinct from the protein that topologically organizes the complex, BacA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".