Energetics of Target Peptide Binding by Calmodulin Reveals Different Modes of Binding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thermodynamic parameters of interactions of calcium-saturated calmodulin (Ca(2+)-CaM) with melittin, C-terminal fragment of melittin, or peptides derived from the CaM binding regions of constitutive (cerebellar) nitric-oxide synthase, cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase, calmodulin-dependent protein kinase I, and caldesmon (CaD-A, CaD-A*) have been measured using isothermal titration calorimetry. The peptides could be separated into two groups according to the change in heat capacity upon complex formation, DeltaC(p). The calmodulin-dependent protein kinase I, constitutive (cerebellar) nitric-oxide synthase, and melittin peptides have DeltaC(p) values clustered around -3.2 kJ.mol(-1).K(-1), consistent with the formation of a globular CaM-peptide complex in the canonical fashion. In contrast, phosphodiesterase, the C-terminal fragment of melittin, CaD-A, and CaD-A* have DeltaC(p) values clustered around -1.6 kJ.mol(-1).K(-1), indicative of interactions between the peptide and mostly one lobe of CaM, probably the C-terminal lobe. It is also shown that the interactions for different peptides with Ca(2+)-CaM can be either enthalpically or entropically driven. The difference in the energetics of peptide/Ca(2+)-CaM complex formation appears to be due to the coupling of peptide/Ca(2+)-CaM complex formation to the coil-helix transition of the peptide. The binding of a helical peptide to Ca(2+)-CaM is dominated by favorable entropic effects, which are probably mostly due to hydrophobic interactions between nonpolar groups of the peptide and Ca(2+)-CaM. Applications of these findings to the design of potential CaM inhibitors are discussed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".