Conjugative Mating Assays for Sequence-specific Analysis of Transfer Proteins Involved in Bacterial Conjugation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transfer of genetic material by bacterial conjugation is a process that takes place via complexes formed by specific transfer proteins. In Escherichia coli, these transfer proteins make up a DNA transfer machinery known as the mating pair formation, or DNA transfer complex, which facilitates conjugative plasmid transfer. The objective of this paper is to provide a method that can be used to determine the role of a specific transfer protein that is involved in conjugation using a series of deletions and/or point mutations in combination with mating assays. The target gene is knocked out on the conjugative plasmid and is then provided in trans through the use of a small recovery plasmid harboring the target gene. Mutations affecting the target gene on the recovery plasmid can reveal information about functional aspects of the target protein that result in the alteration of mating efficiency of donor cells harboring the mutated gene. Alterations in mating efficiency provide insight into the role and importance of the particular transfer protein, or a region therein, in facilitating conjugative DNA transfer. Coupling this mating assay with detailed three-dimensional structural studies will provide a comprehensive understanding of the function of the conjugative transfer protein as well as provide a means for identifying and characterizing regions of protein-protein interaction.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".