ARFGAP1 promotes the formation of COPI vesicles, suggesting function as a component of the coat
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of GTPase-activating protein (GAP) that deactivates ADP-ribosylation factor 1 (ARF1) during the formation of coat protein I (COPI) vesicles has been unclear. GAP is originally thought to antagonize vesicle formation by triggering uncoating, but later studies suggest that GAP promotes cargo sorting, a process that occurs during vesicle formation. Recent models have attempted to reconcile these seemingly contradictory roles by suggesting that cargo proteins suppress GAP activity during vesicle formation, but whether GAP truly antagonizes coat recruitment in this process has not been assessed directly. We have reconstituted the formation of COPI vesicles by incubating Golgi membrane with purified soluble components, and find that ARFGAP1 in the presence of GTP promotes vesicle formation and cargo sorting. Moreover, the presence of GTPgammaS not only blocks vesicle uncoating but also vesicle formation by preventing the proper recruitment of GAP to nascent vesicles. Elucidating how GAP functions in vesicle formation, we find that the level of GAP on the reconstituted vesicles is at least as abundant as COPI and that GAP binds directly to the dilysine motif of cargo proteins. Collectively, these findings suggest that ARFGAP1 promotes vesicle formation by functioning as a component of the COPI coat.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it