Phage predation, disease severity, and pathogen genetic diversity in cholera patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite an increasingly detailed picture of the molecular mechanisms of bacteriophage (phage)–bacterial interactions, we lack an understanding of how these interactions evolve and impact disease within patients. In this work, we report a year-long, nationwide study of diarrheal disease patients in Bangladesh. Among cholera patients, we quantified Vibrio cholerae (prey) and its virulent phages (predators) using metagenomics and quantitative polymerase chain reaction while accounting for antibiotic exposure using quantitative mass spectrometry. Virulent phage (ICP1) and antibiotics suppressed V. cholerae to varying degrees and were inversely associated with severe dehydration depending on resistance mechanisms. In the absence of antiphage defenses, predation was “effective,” with a high predator:prey ratio that correlated with increased genetic diversity among the prey. In the presence of antiphage defenses, predation was “ineffective,” with a lower predator:prey ratio that correlated with increased genetic diversity among the predators. Phage-bacteria coevolution within patients should therefore be considered in the deployment of phage-based therapies and diagnostics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".