Identification of a Major Determinant for Serine-Threonine Kinase Phosphoacceptor Specificity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eukaryotic protein kinases are generally classified as being either tyrosine or serine-threonine specific. Though not evident from inspection of their primary sequences, many serine-threonine kinases display a significant preference for serine or threonine as the phosphoacceptor residue. Here we show that a residue located in the kinase activation segment, which we term the "DFG+1" residue, acts as a major determinant for serine-threonine phosphorylation site specificity. Mutation of this residue was sufficient to switch the phosphorylation site preference for multiple kinases, including the serine-specific kinase PAK4 and the threonine-specific kinase MST4. Kinetic analysis of peptide substrate phosphorylation and crystal structures of PAK4-peptide complexes suggested that phosphoacceptor residue preference is not mediated by stronger binding of the favored substrate. Rather, favored kinase-phosphoacceptor combinations likely promote a conformation optimal for catalysis. Understanding the rules governing kinase phosphoacceptor preference allows kinases to be classified as serine or threonine specific based on their sequence.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".