MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Using a Toxicogenomic Approach to Understand How Silver Poisons the Bacterial Cell

2016· article· en· W4389024200 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joe Lemire, Kate Chatfield‐Reed, Gordon Chua, Raymond J. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofilmQuorum sensingBiologyMicrobiologyBacteriaMutantComputational biologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The emergence of the post‐antibiotic era has left us desperate for alternative strategies to combat infectious disease. Historically, silver has been used to prevent and control microbial infections. Silver is now seeing widespread use in a variety of medical devices including bandages, catheters, and endotracheal tubes; as well as numerous household items. Yet, we still don't mechanistically understand how silver poisons the microbial cell. Objectives Recently, our research group demonstrated that the higher oxidation states of silver have an enhanced capacity to eradicate laboratory and antibiotic‐resistant strains of bacteria – both planktonic bacteria as well as biofilms. Our current research objective is to understand the mechanistic details of how silver exerts its toxicity on the bacterial cell. Methodology To address the mechanisms of how silver kills bacterial cells, we used a high‐throughput, toxicogenomic approach ‐ screening a knockout collection of E.coli K12 (the Keio collection) for Ag‐sensitive/resistant mutants. Following our toxicogenomic screen, markerless deletion mutants were generated from statistically significant hits using the Red Recombinase system. The markerless genetic mutants were then subjected to phenotypic and biochemical assays to verify their resistance or sensitivity profile to silver treatment. Results Although silver is thought to exert its toxicity by disrupting thiol metabolism and cellular redox‐status, our results demonstrate that silver poisons E.coli through a variety of previously unestablished mechanisms. These include interfering with genes involved in maintaining cell wall integrity, toxin/antitoxin systems, nutrient catabolism, and quorum sensing. Conclusion Here we demonstrate how a toxicogenomic approach was used to determine the mechanistic manner by which silver poisons the bacterial cell. To that end, the robust nature of this methodology can be used to screen other metals, toxins, and antimicrobials to determine their mechanisms of action. Mechanisms that are desperately needed to develop novel antimicrobial strategies. Support or Funding Information This work has been supported by the Natural Science and Engineering Council of Canada. J.L. is supported by a Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship and an Alberta Innovates Health Solutions Postdoctoral Fellowship Award.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicBacterial biofilms and quorum sensing→French-language works237,207→