MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020933513 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m313936200

The Affinity of GXXXG Motifs in Transmembrane Helix-Helix Interactions Is Modulated by Long-range Communication

2004· article· en· W2020933513 on OpenAlexafffund
Roman A. Melnyk, Sanguk Kim, A. Rachael Curran, Donald M. Engelman, James U. Bowie, Charles M. Deber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of General Medical SciencesWellcome Trust
KeywordsGlycophorinDimerTransmembrane proteinTransmembrane domainLipid bilayerBilayerBiophysicsStructural motifSequence motifMembrane proteinIn silicoChemistryPeptide sequenceBiochemistryCrystallographyBiologyMembraneDNAGeneReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sequence motifs are responsible for ensuring the proper assembly of transmembrane (TM) helices in the lipid bilayer. To understand the mechanism by which the affinity of a common TM-TM interactive motif is controlled at the sequence level, we compared two well characterized GXXXG motif-containing homodimers, those formed by human erythrocyte protein glycophorin A (GpA, high-affinity dimer) and those formed by bacteriophage M13 major coat protein (MCP, low affinity dimer). In both constructs, the GXXXG motif is necessary for TM-TM association. Although the remaining interfacial residues (underlined) in GpA (LIXXGVXXGVXXT) differ from those in MCP (VVXXGAXXGIXXF), molecular modeling performed here indicated that GpA and MCP dimers possess the same overall fold. Thus, we could introduce GpA interfacial residues, alone and in combination, into the MCP sequence to help decrypt the determinants of dimer affinity. Using both in vivo TOXCAT assays and SDS-PAGE gel migration rates of synthetic peptides derived from TM regions of the proteins, we found that the most distal interfacial sites, 12 residues apart (and approximately 18 A in structural space), work in concert to control TM-TM affinity synergistically.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations110
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicLipid Membrane Structure and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207