Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter evaluates the present knowledge about the degree of stability of the genome of enteric bacteria. It discusses about the forces which have contributed to maintaining stability, and considers the types of rearrangements which can and do occur even in those genomes generally considered to be stable. With the use of methods of physical analysis of DNA, and especially the introduction of the use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), used first in Escherichia coli by Smith and colleagues, the genomes of many strains were determined and conservation of gene order was shown to be the rule. It talks about two modifications of PFGE methods, which allow the determination of genome structure in many strains, have been used in representative enteric bacteria. It focuses on the forces which would be expected to act in a conservative way to maintain gene order. It is possible that transspecies recombination due to conjugation or transduction followed by homologous recombination, though very rare, is so important that colinearity is an important advantage. The author concludes that the overall conservation of gene order within the enteric bacteria which was reported many years ago in comparisons of E. coli and Salmonella typhimurium has been confirmed by the analysis of the physical maps of many strains of Salmonella and other enteric bacteria determined by PFGE and by the comparison of nucleotide sequences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.011 |
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".