MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985123658 · doi:10.1021/bi501250m

Distinct Properties of the Two Isoforms of CDP-Diacylglycerol Synthase

2014· article· en· W1985123658 on OpenAlexafffund
Kenneth D’Souza, Yeun Ju Kim, Tamás Balla, Richard M. Epand

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid metabolism and biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPhosphatidic acidDiacylglycerol kinasePhosphatidylinositolBiochemistryPhospholipidChemistryEnzymeSubstrate (aquarium)Gene isoformStereochemistryBiologySignal transductionProtein kinase CGeneMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CDP-diacylglycerol synthases (CDS) are critical enzymes that catalyze the formation of CDP-diacylglycerol (CDP-DAG) from phosphatidic acid (PA). Here we show in vitro that the two isoforms of human CDS, CDS1 and CDS2, show different acyl chain specificities for its lipid substrate. CDS2 is selective for the acyl chains at the sn-1 and sn-2 positions, the most preferred species being 1-stearoyl-2-arachidonoyl-sn-phosphatidic acid. CDS1, conversely, shows no particular substrate specificity, displaying similar activities for almost all substrates tested. Additionally, we show that inhibition of CDS2 by phosphatidylinositol is also acyl chain-dependent, with the strongest inhibition seen with the 1-stearoyl-2-arachidonoyl species. CDS1 shows no acyl chain-dependent inhibition. Both CDS1 and CDS2 are inhibited by their anionic phospholipid end products, with phosphatidylinositol-(4,5)-bisphosphate showing the strongest inhibition. Our results indicate that CDS1 and CDS2 could create different CDP-DAG pools that may serve to enrich different phospholipid species with specific acyl chains.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations61
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistrySame topicLipid metabolism and biosynthesisFrench-language works237,207