MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385331343 · doi:10.1099/mic.0.001371

The transport of mannitol in Sinorhizobium meliloti is carried out by a broad-substrate polyol transporter SmoEFGK and is affected by the ability to transport and metabolize fructose

2023· article· en· W4385331343 on OpenAlexafffund
MacLean G. Kohlmeier, Ivan J. Oresnik

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLegume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiochemistryArabitolMannitolPermeaseSorbitolGalactitolOperonBiologyFructoseComplementationMutantChemistryXylitolGeneFermentationGalactose

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The smo locus ( s orbitol m annitol o xidation) is found on the chromosome of S. meliloti ’s tripartite genome. Mutations at the smo locus reduce or abolish the ability of the bacterium to grow on several carbon sources, including sorbitol, mannitol, galactitol, d -arabitol and maltitol. The contribution of the smo locus to the metabolism of these compounds has not been previously investigated. Genetic complementation of mutant strains revealed that smoS is responsible for growth on sorbitol and galactitol, while mtlK restores growth on mannitol and d -arabitol. Dehydrogenase assays demonstrate that SmoS and MtlK are NAD + -dependent dehydrogenases catalysing the oxidation of their specific substrates. Transport experiments using a radiolabeled substrate indicate that sorbitol, mannitol and d -arabitol are primarily transported into the cell by the ABC transporter encoded by smoEFGK . Additionally, it was found that a mutation in either frcK , which is found in an operon that encodes the fructose ABC transporter, or a mutation in frk , which encodes fructose kinase, leads to the induction of mannitol transport.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiologySame topicLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisFrench-language works237,207