A comprehensive two-hybrid analysis to explore the <i>L. pneumophila</i> effector-effector interactome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Legionella pneumophila uses over 300 translocated effector proteins to rewire host cells during infection and create a replicative niche for intracellular growth. To date, several studies have identified L. pneumophila effectors that indirectly and directly regulate the activity of other effectors, providing an additional layer of regulatory complexity. Amongst these are “metaeffectors” – a special class of effectors that regulate the activity of other effectors once inside the host. A defining feature of metaeffectors is direct, physical interaction with a target effector. Metaeffector identification to date has depended on phenotypes in heterologous systems and experimental serendipity. Using a multiplexed, recombinant-barcode-based yeast two-hybrid technology we screened for protein-protein interactions amongst all L. pneumophila effectors and several components of the Dot/Icm type IV secretion system (>167,000 protein combinations). Of the 52 protein interactions identified by this approach, 44 are novel protein interactions, including ten novel effector-effector interactions (doubling the number of known effector-effector interactions).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".