MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002327674 · doi:10.1139/w02-076

Inositol phosphatase activity of the<i>Escherichia coli agp-</i>encoded acid glucose-1-phosphatase

2002· article· en· W2002327674 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Michael Cottrill, Serguei P. Golovan, J. P. Phillips, Cecil W. Forsberg

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Microbiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPhytase and its Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHydrolysisPhosphatePhosphataseInositolChemistryBiochemistryAlkaline phosphataseInositol phosphateAcid phosphataseEscherichia coliEnzymeChromatographyPhosphoric monoester hydrolasesGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When screening an Escherichia coli gene library for myo-inositol hexakisphosphate (InsP6) phosphatases (phytases), we discovered that the agp-encoded acid glucose-1-phosphatase also possesses this activity. Purified Agp hydrolyzes glucose-1-phosphate, p-nitrophenyl phosphate, and InsP6 with pH optima, 6.5, 3.5, and 4.5, respectively, and was stable when incubated at pH values ranging from 3 to 10. Glucose-1-phosphate was hydrolyzed most efficiently at 55 degrees C. while InsP6 and p-nitrophenyl phosphate were hydrolyzed maximally at 60 degrees C. The Agp exhibited Km values of (0.39 mM, 13 mM, and 0.54 mM for the hydrolysis of glucose-1-phosphate, p-nitrophenyl phosphate, and InsP6, respectively. High-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) analysis of inositol phosphate hydrolysis products of Agp demonstrated that the enzyme catalyzes the hydrolysis of phosphate from each of InsP6, D-Ins(1,2,3,4,5)P5, Ins(1,3,4,5,6)P5, and Ins(1,2,3,4,6)P5, producing D/L-Ins(1,2,4,5,6)P5. D-Ins(1,2,4,5)P4, D/L-Ins(1,4,5,6)P4 and D/L-Ins(1,2,4,6)P4, respectively. These data support the contention that Agp is a 3-phosphatase.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of MicrobiologySame topicPhytase and its ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207