Prediction and Experimental Characterization of nsSNPs Altering Human PDZ-Binding Motifs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are a major contributor to genetic and phenotypic variation within populations. Non-synonymous SNPs (nsSNPs) modify the sequence of proteins and can affect their folding or binding properties. Experimental analysis of all nsSNPs is currently unfeasible and therefore computational predictions of the molecular effect of nsSNPs are helpful to guide experimental investigations. While some nsSNPs can be accurately characterized, for instance if they fall into strongly conserved or well annotated regions, the molecular consequences of many others are more challenging to predict. In particular, nsSNPs affecting less structured, and often less conserved regions, are difficult to characterize. Binding sites that mediate protein-protein or other protein interactions are an important class of functional sites on proteins and can be used to help interpret nsSNPs. Binding sites targeted by the PDZ modular peptide recognition domain have recently been characterized. Here we use this data to show that it is possible to computationally identify nsSNPs in PDZ binding motifs that modify or prevent binding to the proteins containing the motifs. We confirm these predictions by experimentally validating a selected subset with ELISA. Our work also highlights the importance of better characterizing linear motifs in proteins as many of these can be affected by genetic variations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".