Diversity of G proteins in Lepidopteran cell lines: Partial sequences of six G protein alpha subunits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this work was to sample the diversity of G protein alpha subunits in lepidopteran insect cell lines. Here we report the amplification by degenerate PCR of partial sequences representing six G protein alpha subunits from three different lepidopteran insect cell lines. Sequence comparisons with known G protein alpha subunits indicate that the Sf9, Ld and High Five cell lines each contain (at least) one Galpha(q)-like and one Galpha(i)-like Galpha subunit. All six PCR products are unique at the nucleotide level, but the translation products of the three Galpha q-like partial clones (Sf9-Galpha 1, Ld-Galpha 1, and Hi5-Galpha 1) are identical, as are the translation products of the three Galpha i-like partial clones (Sf9-Galpha 2, Ld-Galpha 2, and Hi5-Galpha 2). Both the Galpha(q)-like and Galpha(i)-like translation products are identical to known Galpha subunits from other Lepidoptera, are highly similar (88-98%) to Galpha subunits from other invertebrates including mosquitoes, fruit flies, lobsters, crabs, and snails, and are also highly similar (88-90%) to known mammalian Galpha subunits. Identification of G protein alpha subunits in lepidopteran cell lines will assist in host cell line selection when insect cell lines are used for the pharmacological analysis of human GPCRs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".