Metabolic and genetic basis for auxotrophies in Gram-negative species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auxotrophies constrain the interactions of bacteria with their environment, but are often difficult to identify. Here, we develop an algorithm (AuxoFind) using genome-scale metabolic reconstruction to predict auxotrophies and apply it to a series of available genome sequences of over 1,300 Gram-negative strains. We identify 54 auxotrophs, along with the corresponding metabolic and genetic basis, using a pangenome approach, and highlight auxotrophies conferring a fitness advantage in vivo. We show that the metabolic basis of auxotrophy is species-dependent and varies with 1) pathway structure, 2) enzyme promiscuity, and 3) network redundancy. Various levels of complexity constitute the genetic basis, including 1) deleterious single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), in-frame indels, and deletions; 2) single/multigene deletion; and 3) movement of mobile genetic elements (including prophages) combined with genomic rearrangements. Fourteen out of 19 predictions agree with experimental evidence, with the remaining cases highlighting shortcomings of sequencing, assembly, annotation, and reconstruction that prevent predictions of auxotrophies. We thus develop a framework to identify the metabolic and genetic basis for auxotrophies in Gram-negatives.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".