Kinetics and stereochemistry of the<i>Cellulomonas fimi</i>β-mannanase studied using<sup>1</sup>H-NMR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endo–1,4-β-mannanases (β-mannanases) randomly hydrolyse the mannosidic bonds within the main chain of various mannans and heteromannans. Some of these polysaccharides are hemicelluloses, a major part of the plant cell-wall. The β-mannanases have been assigned to family 5 and 26 of the glycoside hydrolase clan A. This work presents a detailed kinetic analysis of the family 26 β-mannanase CfMan26A from the soil-bacterium Cellulomonas fimi. The full-length enzyme consists of five modules: a family 26 catalytic module, an immunoglobulin-like module, a mannan-binding module, a surface layer homology-module and a module of unknown function. A truncated variant consisting of the catalytic module and the immunoglobulin-like module was used in these studies. The degradation of mannotriose, mannotetraose and mannopentaose was studied by 1H-NMR. First, the mutarotation of one of the hydrolysis products (mannose) was determined to be 1.7 10−5s−1 at 5°C and pH 5.0. As expected for a family 26 glycoside hydrolase, the hydrolysis was shown to proceed with overall retention of the anomeric configuration. Many ‘retaining’ enzymes can perform transglycosylation reactions. However, no transglycosylation could be detected. Kinetic constants were calculated from progress curves using computer simulation. It was revealed that the −3 subsite had a greater impact on the apparent kcat/Km ratio (the catalytic efficiency) than the +2 subsite. The β-anomer of mannotriose was hydrolysed 1000-times more efficiently than the α-anomer indicating selectivity for the β- over the α-anomer in the +1 subsite. With background information from the previous published 3D-structure of the truncated variant of Man26A, a structural explanation for the observations is 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 | 0.001 |
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".