Identification of putative essential protein domains from high-density transposon insertion sequencing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A first clue to gene function can be obtained by examining whether a gene is required for life in certain standard conditions, that is, whether a gene is essential. In bacteria, essential genes are usually identified by high-density transposon mutagenesis followed by sequencing of insertion sites (Tn-seq). These studies assign the term "essential" to whole genes rather than the protein domain sequences that encode the essential functions. However, genes can code for multiple protein domains that evolve their functions independently. Therefore, when essential genes code for more than one protein domain, only one of them could be essential. In this study, we defined this subset of genes as "essential domain-containing" (EDC) genes. Using a Tn-seq data set built-in Burkholderia cenocepacia K56-2, we developed an in silico pipeline to identify EDC genes and the essential protein domains they encode. We found forty candidate EDC genes and demonstrated growth defect phenotypes using CRISPR interference (CRISPRi). This analysis included two knockdowns of genes encoding the protein domains of unknown function DUF2213 and DUF4148. These putative essential domains are conserved in more than two hundred bacterial species, including human and plant pathogens. Together, our study suggests that essentiality should be assigned to individual protein domains rather than genes, contributing to a first functional characterization of protein domains of unknown function.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".