Anti-phage defence through inhibition of virion assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacteria have evolved diverse antiviral defence mechanisms to protect themselves against phage infection. Phages integrated into bacterial chromosomes, known as prophages, also encode defences that protect the bacterial hosts in which they reside. Here, we identify a type of anti-phage defence that interferes with the virion assembly pathway of invading phages. The protein that mediates this defence, which we call Tab (for 'Tail assembly blocker'), is constitutively expressed from a Pseudomonas aeruginosa prophage. Tab allows the invading phage replication cycle to proceed, but blocks assembly of the phage tail, thus preventing formation of infectious virions. While the infected cell dies through the activity of the replicating phage lysis proteins, there is no release of infectious phage progeny, and the bacterial community is thereby protected from a phage epidemic. Prophages expressing Tab are not inhibited during their own lytic cycle because they express a counter-defence protein that interferes with Tab function. Thus, our work reveals an anti-phage defence that operates by blocking virion assembly, thereby both preventing formation of phage progeny and allowing destruction of the infected cell due to expression of phage lysis genes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".