MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996566461 · doi:10.1021/jp407536p

Conformational Biases of Linear Motifs

2013· article· en· W1996566461 on OpenAlexafffund
Elio A. Cino, Wing‐Yiu Choy, Mikko Karttunen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAffinitiesMolecular dynamicsFunction (biology)Amino acidAmino acid residueBinding affinitiesProtein structureBiophysicsComputational biologyChemistryPeptide sequenceBiologyBiochemistryGeneticsComputational chemistryReceptorGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear motifs (LMs) are protein-protein interaction sites, typically consisting of ~4-20 amino acid residues that are often found in disordered proteins or regions, and function largely independent from other parts of the proteins they are found in. These short sequence patterns are involved in a wide spectrum of biological functions including cell cycle control, transcriptional regulation, enzymatic catalysis, cell signaling, protein trafficking, etc. Even though LMs may adopt defined structures in complexes with targets, which can be determined by conventional methods, their uncomplexed states can be highly dynamic and difficult to characterize. This hinders our understanding of the structure-function relationship of LMs. Here, the uncomplexed states of 6 different LMs are investigated using atomistic molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. The total simulation time was about 63 μs. The results show that LMs can have distinct conformational propensities, which often resemble their complexed state. As a result, the free state structure and dynamics of LMs may hold important clues regarding binding mechanisms, affinities and specificities. The findings should be helpful in advancing our understanding of the mechanisms whereby disordered amino acid sequences bind targets, modeling disordered proteins/regions, and computational prediction of binding affinities.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

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 head0.239
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207