The loop structure of <i>Actinomycete</i> glycoside hydrolase family 5 mannanases governs substrate recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endo-β-1,4-mannanases from Streptomyces thermolilacinus (StMan) and Thermobifida fusca (TfMan) demonstrated different substrate specificities. StMan hydrolyzed galactosylmannooligosaccharide (GGM5; 6(III) ,6(IV) -α-d-galactosyl mannopentaose) to GGM3 and M2, whereas TfMan hydrolyzed GGM5 to GGM4 and M1. To determine the region involved in the substrate specificity, we constructed chimeric enzymes of StMan and TfMan and evaluated their substrate specificities. Moreover, the crystal structure of the catalytic domain of StMan (StMandC) and the complex structure of the inactive mutant StE273AdC with M6 were solved at resolutions of 1.60 and 1.50 Å, respectively. Structural comparisons of StMandC and the catalytic domain of TfMan lead to the identification of a subsite around -1 in StMandC that could accommodate a galactose branch. These findings demonstrate that the two loops (loop7 and loop8) are responsible for substrate recognition in GH5 actinomycete mannanases. In particular, Trp281 in loop7 of StMan, which is located in a narrow and deep cleft, plays an important role in its affinity toward linear substrates. Asp310 in loop8 of StMan specifically bound to the galactosyl unit in the -1 subsite.
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) | 0.001 | 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".