Strengthening phage resistance of Streptococcus thermophilus by leveraging complementary defense systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CRISPR-Cas and restriction-modification systems represent the core defense arsenal in Streptococcus thermophilus, but their effectiveness is compromised by phages encoding anti-CRISPR proteins (ACRs) and other counter-defense strategies. Here, we explore the defensome of 263 S. thermophilus strains to uncover other anti-phage systems. The defense landscape of S. thermophilus is enriched by 21 accessory defense systems, 13 of which have never been investigated in this species. Experimental validation of 17 systems with 14 phages reveals a range of anti-phage activities, highlighting both broad and narrow specificities across the five viral genera infecting S. thermophilus. Synergies are observed when combining CRISPR immunity with accessory systems. We also assess the fitness cost associated with the chromosomal integration of these systems in their native context and find no impact under laboratory or industrial conditions. These findings underscore the potential of these accessory defense systems to enhance the resistance of S. thermophilus, particularly against ACR-encoding phages.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".