Genome to Kinome: Species-Specific Peptide Arrays for Kinome Analysis
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
Tools for conducting high-throughput kinome analysis do not exist for many species. For example, two commonly used techniques for monitoring phosphorylation events are phosphorylation-specific antibodies and peptide arrays. The majority of phosphorylation-specific antibodies are for human or mouse targets, and the construction of peptide arrays relies on information from phosphorylation databases, which are similarly biased toward human and mouse data. This is a substantial obstacle because many species other than mouse represent important biological models. On the basis of the observation that phosphorylation events are often conserved across species with respect to their relative positioning within proteins and their biological function, we demonstrate that it is possible to predict the sequence contexts of phosphorylation events in other species for the production of peptide arrays for kinome analysis. Through this approach, genomic information can be rapidly used to create inexpensive, customizable, species-specific peptide arrays for high-throughput kinome analysis. We anticipate that these arrays will be valuable for investigating the conservation of biological responses across species, validating animal models of disease, and translating research to clinical applications.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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