MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980917046 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m009710200

The C Terminus of Annexin II Mediates Binding to F-actin

2001· article· en· W1980917046 on OpenAlexaff
Nolan R. Filipenko, David M. Waisman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicS100 Proteins and Annexins
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsHeterotetramerAnnexin A2Protein subunitAnnexinActinActin-binding proteinBiochemistryMolecular biologyMutantBiologyCell biologyChemistryActin cytoskeletonCytoskeletonIn vitroCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annexin II heterotetramer (AIIt) is a multifunctional Ca(2+)-binding protein composed of two 11-kDa subunits and two annexin II subunits. The annexin II subunit contains the binding sites for anionic phospholipids, heparin, and F-actin, whereas the p11 subunit provides a regulatory function. The F-actin-binding site is presently unknown. In the present study we have utilized site-directed mutagenesis to create annexin II mutants with truncations in the C terminus of the molecule. Interestingly, a mutant annexin II lacking its C-terminal 16, 13, or 9 amino acids was unable to bind to F-actin but still retained its ability to interact with both anionic phospholipids and heparin. Recombinant AIIt, composed of wild-type p11 subunits and the mutant annexin II subunits, was also unable to bundle F-actin. This loss of F-actin bundling activity was directly attributable to the inability of mutant AIIt to bind F-actin. These results establish for the first time that the annexin II C-terminal amino acid residues, LLYLCGGDD, participate in F-actin binding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations126
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicS100 Proteins and AnnexinsFrench-language works237,207