MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010477728 · doi:10.1042/bj20040863

Random mutagenesis of bacterial luciferase: critical role of Glu175 in the control of luminescence decay

2005· article· en· W2010477728 on OpenAlexafffund
Saman Hosseinkhani, Rose Szittner, Edward A. Meighen

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicbioluminescence and chemiluminescence research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsLuciferasesLuciferasePhotobacterium phosphoreumPhotorhabdus luminescensBiologyBioluminescencePhotobacteriumVibrioBiochemistryMutagenesisMutantBacteriaGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacterial luciferases (LuxAB) can be readily classed as slow or fast decay luciferases based on their rates of luminescence decay in a single turnover assay. Luciferases from Vibrio harveyi and Xenorhabdus (Photorhabdus) luminescens have slow decay rates, and those from the Photobacterium genus, such as Photobacterium fisheri, P. phosphoreum and P. leiognathi, have rapid decay rates. By substitution of a 67-amino-acid stretch of P. phosphoreum LuxA in the central region of the LuxA subunit, the 'slow' X. luminescens luciferase was converted into a chimaeric luciferase with a significantly more rapid decay rate [Valkova, Szittner and Meighen (1999) Biochemistry 38, 13820-13828]. To understand better the role of specific residues in the classification of luciferases as slow and fast decay, we have conducted random mutagenesis on this region. One of the mutants generated by a single mutation on LuxA at position 175 [E175G (Glu175-->Gly)] resulted in the 'slow decay' X. luminescens luciferase being converted into a luciferase with a significantly more rapid decay rate. These results indicate the importance of Glu175 in LuxA as a critical residue for differentiating between 'slow' and 'fast' luciferases and show that this distinction is primarily due to differences in aldehyde affinity and in the decomposition of the luciferase-flavin-oxygen intermediate.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations37
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical JournalSame topicbioluminescence and chemiluminescence researchFrench-language works237,207