A cluster of diagnostic Hsp68 amino acid sites that are identified in<i>Drosophila</i>from the<i>melanogaster</i>species group are concentrated around β-sheet residues involved with substrate binding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coding region of the hsp68 gene has been amplified, cloned, and sequenced from 10 Drosophila species, 5 from the melanogaster subgroup and 5 from the montium subgroup. When the predicted amino acid sequences are compared with available Hsp70 sequences, patterns of conservation suggest that the C-terminal region should be subdivided according to predominant secondary structure. Conservation levels between Hsp68 and Hsp70 proteins were high in the N-terminal ATPase and adjacent beta-sheet domains, medium in the alpha-helix domain, and low in the C-terminal mobile domain (78%, 72%, 41%, and 21% identity, respectively). A number of amino acid sites were found to be "diagnostic" for Hsp68 (28 of approximately 635 residues). A few of these occur in the ATPase domain (385 residues) but most (75%) are concentrated in the beta-sheet and alpha-helix domains (34% of the protein) with none in the short mobile domain. Five of the diagnostic sites in the beta-sheet domain are clustered around, but not coincident with, functional sites known to be involved in substrate binding. Nearly all of the Hsp70 family length variation occurs in the mobile domain. Within montium subgroup species, 2 nearly identical hsp68 PCR products that differed in length are either different alleles or products of an ancestral hsp68 duplication.
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".