Gas phase noncovalent protein complexes that retain solution binding properties: Binding of xylobiose inhibitors to the β-1, 4 exoglucanase from <i>Cellulomonas fimi</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tandem mass spectrometry has been used to compare gas-phase and solution binding of three small-molecule inhibitors to the wild type and three mutant forms of the catalytic domain of Cex, an enzyme that hydrolyses xylan and xylo-oligosaccharides. The inhibitors, xylobiosyl-deoxynojirimycin, xylobiosyl-isofagomine lactam, and xylobiosyl-isofagomine consist of a common distal xylose linked to different proximal aza-sugars. The three mutant forms of the enzyme contain the substitutions Asn44Ala, Gln87Met, and Gln87Tyr that alter the binding interactions between Cex and the distal sugar of each inhibitor. An electrospray ionization (ESI) triple quadrupole MS/MS system is used to measure the internal energies, DeltaE(int), that must be added to gas-phase ions to cause dissociation of the noncovalent enzyme-inhibitor complexes. Collision cross sections of ions of the apo-enzyme and enzyme-inhibitor complexes, which are required for the calculations of DeltaE(int), have also been measured. The results show that, in the gas phase, enzyme-inhibitor complexes have more compact, folded conformations than the corresponding apo-enzyme ions. With the mutant enzymes, the effects of substituting a single residue can be detected. The energies required to dissociate the gas-phase complexes follow the same trend as the values of DeltaG0 for dissociation of the complexes in solution. This trend is observed both with different inhibitors, which probe binding to the proximal sugar, and with mutants of Cex, which probe binding to the distal sugar. Thus the gas-phase complexes appear to retain much of their solution binding characteristics.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".