Type 1 and Type 2 scenarios in hydrogen exchange mass spectrometry studies on protein–ligand complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrogen/deuterium exchange (HDX) mass spectrometry (MS) is a widely used technique for probing protein structure and dynamics. Exposure to D2O induces the deuteration of backbone N-H groups via a process that involves transient excursions to partially unfolded protein conformers. The resulting mass shifts can be probed by MS, usually in combination with proteolytic digestion and/or electron-based fragmentation. Studies on protein-ligand complexes represent a particularly important HDX/MS application. The prevailing view is that ligand binding should reduce deuteration rates, and it is often expected that this reduction will be most pronounced in the vicinity of the interaction site. Many protein-ligand systems do indeed behave in a fashion that is consistent with this paradigm. In this review we point out that the opposite effect may be encountered as well. Also, mixed scenarios are possible where ligand binding induces elevated HDX rates in some protein regions, whereas rates in other segments are reduced. We present a framework that links ligand-induced changes in HDX kinetics to alterations in the occupancy of excited protein conformers. Spontaneous ligand binding will always lower the free energy of the ground state. In contrast, the corresponding free energy shifts of excited states are largely unpredictable, giving rise to a range of possible HDX responses. "Type 1" scenarios, characterized by a reduction of HDX rates are just as feasible as "Type 2" behavior where deuteration is accelerated. Even "Type 0" phenomena may be encountered, where HDX rates are unaffected by the presence of ligand. Type 0/1/2 scenarios can coexist in the same protein (these terms are not to be confused with the EX1/EX2 expressions which refer to a different aspect of protein HDX). Allosteric effects and ligand-induced protein-protein contacts can affect the outcome of protein-ligand binding studies as well. In summary, comparative HDX measurements conducted in the presence and in the absence ligand provide a detailed fingerprint of biomolecular interactions. However, protein-ligand interactions can elicit a wide range of responses, and the interpretation of binding site mapping experiments may not always be straightforward.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".