Molecular evolution of type VI intermediate filament proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tanabin, transitin and nestin are type VI intermediate filament (IF) proteins that are developmentally regulated in frogs, birds and mammals, respectively. Tanabin is expressed in the growth cones of embryonic vertebrate neurons, whereas transitin and nestin are found in myogenic and neurogenic cells. Another type VI IF protein, synemin, is expressed in undifferentiated and mature muscle cells of birds and mammals. In addition to an IF-typical alpha-helical core domain, type VI IF proteins are characterized by a long C-terminal tail often containing distinct repeated motifs. The molecular evolution of type VI IF proteins remains poorly studied. RESULTS: To examine the evolutionary history of type VI IF proteins, sequence comparisons, BLAST searches, synteny studies and phylogenic analyses were performed. This study provides new evidence that tanabin, transitin and nestin are indeed orthologous type VI IF proteins. It demonstrates that tanabin, transitin and nestin genes share intron positions and sequence identities, have a similar chromosomal context and display closely related positions in phylogenic analyses. Despite this homology, fast evolution rates of their C-terminal extremity have caused the appearance of repeated motifs with distinct biological activities. In particular, our in silico and in vitro analyses of their tail domain have shown that (avian) transitin, but not (mammalian) nestin, contains a repeat domain displaying nucleotide hydrolysis activity. CONCLUSION: These analyses of the evolutionary history of the IF proteins fit with a model in which type VI IFs form a branch distinct from NF proteins and are composed of two major proteins: synemin and nestin orthologs. Rapid evolution of the C-terminal extremity of nestin orthologs could be responsible for their divergent functions.
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 | 0.001 | 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".