A Structural and Functional Analysis of α-Glucan Recognition by Family 25 and 26 Carbohydrate-binding Modules Reveals a Conserved Mode of Starch Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Starch-hydrolyzing enzymes lacking alpha-glucan-specific carbohydrate-binding modules (CBMs) typically have lowered activity on granular starch relative to their counterparts with CBMs. Thus, consideration of starch recognition by CBMs is a key factor in understanding granular starch hydrolysis. To this end, we have dissected the modular structure of the maltohexaose-forming amylase from Bacillus halodurans (C-125). This five-module protein comprises an N-terminal family 13 catalytic module followed in order by two modules of unknown function, a family 26 CBM (BhCBM26), and a family 25 CBM (BhCBM25). Here we present a comprehensive structure-function analysis of starch and alpha-glucooligosaccharide recognition by BhCBM25 and BhCBM26 using UV methods, isothermal titration calorimetry, and x-ray crystallography. The results reveal that the two CBMs bind alpha-glucooligosaccharides, particularly those containing alpha-1,6 linkages, with different affinities but have similar abilities to bind granular starch. Notably, these CBMs appear to recognize the same binding sites in granular starch. The enhanced affinity of the tandem CBMs for granular starch is suggested to be the main biological advantage for this enzyme to contain two CBMs. Structural studies of the native and ligand-bound forms of BhCBM25 and BhCBM26 show a structurally conserved mode of ligand recognition but through non-sequence-conserved residues. Comparison of these CBM structures with other starch-specific CBM structures reveals a generally conserved mode of starch recognition.
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) | 0.001 | 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".