MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977627837 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1418084112

Structure and mechanism of <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> TarM, the wall teichoic acid α-glycosyltransferase

2015· article· en· W1977627837 on OpenAlexafffund
Solmaz Sobhanifar, L.J. Worrall, Robert J. Gruninger, Gregory A. Wasney, Markus Blaukopf, Lars Baumann, Emilie Lameignère, Matthew Solomonson, Eric D. Brown, Stephen G. Withers, N.C.J. Strynadka

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCarbohydrate Chemistry and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsTeichoic acidChemistryPeptidoglycanCell wallBiochemistryStereochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unique to Gram-positive bacteria, wall teichoic acids are anionic glycopolymers cross-stitched to a thick layer of peptidoglycan. The polyol phosphate subunits of these glycopolymers are decorated with GlcNAc sugars that are involved in phage binding, genetic exchange, host antibody response, resistance, and virulence. The search for the enzymes responsible for GlcNAcylation in Staphylococcus aureus has recently identified TarM and TarS with respective α- and β-(1-4) glycosyltransferase activities. The stereochemistry of the GlcNAc attachment is important in balancing biological processes, such that the interplay of TarM and TarS is likely important for bacterial pathogenicity and survival. Here we present the crystal structure of TarM in an unusual ternary-like complex consisting of a polymeric acceptor substrate analog, UDP from a hydrolyzed donor, and an α-glyceryl-GlcNAc product formed in situ. These structures support an internal nucleophilic substitution-like mechanism, lend new mechanistic insight into the glycosylation of glycopolymers, and reveal a trimerization domain with a likely role in acceptor substrate scaffolding.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicCarbohydrate Chemistry and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207