MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995167752 · doi:10.3390/pathogens9010006

The Role of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Lipopolysaccharide in Bacterial Pathogenesis and Physiology

2019· review· en· W2995167752 on OpenAlexafffund
Steven M. Huszczynski, Joseph S. Lam, Cezar M. Khursigara

Bibliographic record

VenuePathogens · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPseudomonas aeruginosaLipopolysaccharideMicrobiologyBacterial outer membraneLipid AImmune systemBiofilmBacteriaBiologySecretionPathogenAntibioticsOrganismGram-negative bacteriaImmunologyGeneEscherichia coliBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The major constituent of the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria is lipopolysaccharide (LPS), which is comprised of lipid A, core oligosaccharide, and O antigen, which is a long polysaccharide chain extending into the extracellular environment. Due to the localization of LPS, it is a key molecule on the bacterial cell wall that is recognized by the host to deploy an immune defence in order to neutralize invading pathogens. However, LPS also promotes bacterial survival in a host environment by protecting the bacteria from these threats. This review explores the relationship between the different LPS glycoforms of the opportunistic pathogen Pseudomonas aeruginosa and the ability of this organism to cause persistent infections, especially in the genetic disease cystic fibrosis. We also discuss the role of LPS in facilitating biofilm formation, antibiotic resistance, and how LPS may be targeted by new antimicrobial therapies.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations204
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathogensSame topicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensingFrench-language works237,207