Gene Dispensability in Escherichia coli Grown in Thirty Different Carbon Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there has been much study of bacterial gene dispensability, there is a lack of comprehensive genome-scale examinations of the impact of gene deletion on growth in different carbon sources. In this context, a lot can be learned from such experiments in the model microbe Escherichia coli where much is already understood and there are existing tools for the investigation of carbon metabolism and physiology (1). Gene deletion studies have practical potential in the field of antibiotic drug discovery where there is emerging interest in bacterial central metabolism as a target for new antibiotics (2). Furthermore, some carbon utilization pathways have been shown to be critical for initiating and maintaining infection for certain pathogens and sites of infection (3–5). Here, with the use of high-throughput solid medium phenotyping methods, we have generated kinetic growth measurements for 3,796 genes under 30 different carbon source conditions. This data set provides a foundation for research that will improve our understanding of genes with unknown function, aid in predicting potential antibiotic targets, validate and advance metabolic models, and help to develop our understanding of E. coli metabolism.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".