Experimental determination of the propulsion matrix of the body of helical <i>Magnetospirillum magneticum</i> cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Helical-shaped magnetotactic bacteria provide a rare opportunity to precisely measure both the translational and rotational friction coefficients of micron-sized chiral particles. The possibility to align these cells with a uniform magnetic field allows clearly separating diffusion along and perpendicular to their longitudinal axis. Meanwhile, their corkscrew shape allows detecting rotations around their longitudinal axis, after which orientation correlation analysis can be used to retrieve rotational diffusion coefficients in the two principal directions. Using light microscopy, we measured the four principal friction coefficients of deflagellated Magnetospirillum magneticum cells, and compared our results to that expected for cylinders of comparable size. We show that for rotational motions, the overall dimensions of the cell body are what matters most, while the exact body shape has a larger influence on translational motions. To obtain a full characterization of the friction matrix of these elongated chiral particles, we also quantified the coupling between the rotation around and translation along the longitudinal axis of the cell. Our results suggest that for this bacterial species cell body rotation could significantly contribute to cellular propulsion.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".