MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Taxonomy and diversity of aldehyde dehydrogenases in bacteria of the <i>Pseudomonas</i> genus

2019· article· en· W3175345358 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Adriana Julián‐Sánchez, Héctor Riveros‐Rosas, Gabriel Moreno‐Hagelsieb, Rosario A. Muñoz‐Clares

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsBiologyPseudomonasBacteriaGenomeGeneGeneticsBacterial genome sizeAldehyde dehydrogenaseProteomeMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aldehyde dehydrogenases (ALDHs) comprise one of the most ancient protein superfamilies widely distributed in the three domains of life. Their members have been extensively studied in animals and plants, sorted out in different ALDH protein families and their participation in a broad variety of metabolic pathways has been documented. Paradoxically, no systematic studies comprising ALDHs from bacteria have been performed despite their extensive metabolic capacity, their ability to produce multiple secondary metabolites, as well as their ability to use various carbon sources. Among bacteria, Pseudomonas is one of the most complex bacterial genera and is currently the genus of Gram‐negative bacteria with the largest number of known species. Pseudomonas include a metabolically versatile group of organisms that occupy numerous ecological niches. For these reasons, we selected the Pseudomonas genus as a paradigm to analyze the diversity of ALDHs in bacteria. With this aim, complete Pseudomonas genome sequences and annotations were retrieved from NCBI's RefSeq genome database. The 258 retrieved Pseudomonas strains belong to 46 different species, along with 23 with no species designation. The genomes of these Pseudomonas strains contain from 3,315 to 6,825 annotated protein coding genes. A total of 6,510 ALDH sequences were found in the selected Pseudomonas strains, with a median of 24 ALDH‐coding genes per strain (by comparison humans possess only 19 different aldh loci). Pseudomonas saudiphocaensis possesses the lowest number of aldh genes (9), but also possesses the smallest proteome (3,315 protein coding genes). In contrast, Pseudomonas pseudoalcaligenes KF707 NBRC110670 possesses the maximum number of aldh genes (49), with a proteome below the average size (5,571 protein coding genes). The ALDHs found in Pseudomonas can be sorted out in 42 protein families, with a predominance of 14 families, which contained 76% of all ALDHs found. In this regard, it is important to note that many Pseudomonas genomes have multiple aldh genes coding for proteins belonging to the same family. Given that all strains contained at least one member of families ALDH4, ALDH5, ALDH6, ALDH14, ALDH18 and ALDH27, we consider these families to be part of the core Pseudomonas genome, and are involved in proline metabolism (ALDH4 and ALDH18), succinate and GABA metabolism (ALDH5), valine and β‐alanine metabolism (ALDH6), ethanol and ethanolamine catabolism (ALDH14), and polyamines and histamine catabolism (ALDH27). Support or Funding Information Financially supported by DGAPA‐UNAM (PAPIIT IN225016 & IN218819) grants to HRR, DGAPA‐UNAM (PAPIIT IN220317) and CONACyT 283524 grants to RAMC, and a Discovery Grant from The Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) to GMH. HRR was supported by PASPA‐DGAPA, UNAM program. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies→French-language works237,207→