MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004236588 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2019.12.094

Vibrio cholerae-Symbiont Interactions Inhibit Intestinal Repair in Drosophila

2020· article· en· W3004236588 on OpenAlexafffund
David E. Fast, Kristina Petkau, Meghan Ferguson, Min‐Jeong Shin, Anthony Galenza, Benjamin Kostiuk, Stefan Pukatzki, Edan Foley

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVibrio bacteria research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsVibrio choleraeBiologyIntestinal epitheliumPathogenProgenitor cellSecretionCell biologyMicrobiologyProgenitorEpitheliumStem cellBacteriaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pathogen-mediated damage to the intestinal epithelium activates compensatory growth and differentiation repair programs in progenitor cells. Accelerated progenitor growth replenishes damaged tissue and maintains barrier integrity. Despite the importance of epithelial renewal to intestinal homeostasis, we know little about the effects of pathogen-commensal interactions on progenitor growth. We find that the enteric pathogen Vibrio cholerae blocks critical growth and differentiation pathways in Drosophila progenitors, despite extensive damage to epithelial tissue. We show that the inhibition of epithelial repair requires interactions between the Vibrio cholerae type six secretion system and a community of common symbiotic bacteria, as elimination of the gut microbiome is sufficient to restore homeostatic growth in infected intestines. This work highlights the importance of pathogen-symbiont interactions for intestinal immune responses and outlines the impact of the type six secretion system on pathogenesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicVibrio bacteria research studiesFrench-language works237,207