Tom40 import and TOM complex assembly kinetics in subsarcolemmal and intermyofibrillar mitochondria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The insertion of nuclear‐derived proteins into mitochondria is facilitated by the translocases of the outer membrane (TOM) complex. Tom40 is the main component of this complex. Its import and assembly has not been characterized in skeletal muscle. Thus, our purpose was to compare the import and assembly of Tom40 in muscle subsarcolemmal (SS) and intermyofibrillar (IMF) mitochondria. Tom40 protein levels were not different between SS and IMF mitochondria. However, Tom40 import into the outer membrane was higher (p<0.05) in SS mitochondria at all time points (5, 10, 20 min) when compared to IMF mitochondria. Tom40 assembly was monitored using blue native electrophoresis. Tom40 first assembles into a ~250kDa complex (Intermediate I), followed by a ~120 kDa complex (Intermediate II), before its final insertion into the ~380 kDa TOM complex. In IMF mitochondria, 70–80% of Tom40 was incorporated into Intermediate I by 5 min, whereas only 40–50% was found in Intermediate I in SS mitochondria. However, the sequential incorporation of Tom40 into Intermediate II was less rapid in IMF mitochondria, and only 45% of Tom40 was incorporated into the final TOM complex by 60 min. In contrast, SS mitochondria incorporated 65–70% of Tom40 by 60 min. Thus, despite similar levels of steady state Tom40 protein content, the import and assembly of Tom40 into the TOM complex differs among muscle mitochondrial subtypes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".