Stability of the Glycerol Facilitator in Detergent Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding membrane protein folding and stability is required for a molecular explanation of function and for the development of interventions in membrane protein folding diseases. Stable aqueous detergent solutions of the Escherichia coli glycerol facilitator in its native oligomeric state have been difficult to prepare as the protein readily unfolds and forms nonspecific aggregates. Here, we report a study of the structure and stability of the glycerol facilitator in several detergent solutions by Blue Native and sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE), circular dichroism (CD), and fluorescence. Protein tetramers were prepared in neutral dodecyl maltoside (DDM) and in zwitterionic lysomyristoylphosphatidylcholine (LMPC) detergent solutions that are stable during SDS-PAGE. Thermal unfolding experiments show that the protein is more stable in LMPC than in DDM. Tertiary structure unfolds before quaternary and some secondary structure in LMPC, whereas unfolding is more cooperative in DDM. The high stability of the protein in DDM is evident from the unfolding half-life of 8 days in 8 M urea, suggesting that hydrophobic interactions contribute to the stability. The protein unfolds readily in LMPC below pH 6, whereas the tetramer remains intact at pH 4 in DDM. At pH 4 in DDM, the protein is more sensitive than at neutral pH to unfolding by SDS and the effect is reversible. At pH 3 in DDM, the tetramer unfolds, losing its tertiary structure but retaining native helical structure which melts at significantly lower temperatures than in the native tetramer. The glycerol facilitator prepared in SDS is mainly monomeric and has ~10% less alpha-helix than the native protein. CD suggests that it forms a condensed structure with non-native tertiary contacts highly similar to the state observed in LMPC at low pH. The implications of the results for in vitro and in vivo folding of the protein are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".