MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021428820 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1002199107

Structural organization of the functional domains of <i>Clostridium difficile</i> toxins A and B

2010· article· en· W2021428820 on OpenAlexaff
Rory N. Pruitt, Melissa G. Chambers, Kenneth Ng, Melanie D. Ohi, D. Borden Lacy

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Glycomics CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlucosyltransferaseClostridium difficile toxin AToxinEndocytosisClostridium difficileBiochemistryBiologyClostridium difficile toxin BGlucosyltransferasesEndosomeChemistryMicrobiologyReceptorCell biologyEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clostridium difficile toxins A and B are members of an important class of virulence factors known as large clostridial toxins (LCTs). Toxin action involves four major steps: receptor-mediated endocytosis, translocation of a catalytic glucosyltransferase domain across the membrane, release of the enzymatic moiety by autoproteolytic processing, and a glucosyltransferase-dependent inactivation of Rho family proteins. We have imaged toxin A (TcdA) and toxin B (TcdB) holotoxins by negative stain electron microscopy to show that these molecules are similar in structure. We then determined a 3D structure for TcdA and mapped the organization of its functional domains. The molecule has a "pincher-like" head corresponding to the delivery domain and two tails, long and short, corresponding to the receptor-binding and glucosyltransferase domains, respectively. A second structure, obtained at the acidic pH of an endosome, reveals a significant structural change in the delivery and glucosyltransferase domains, and thus provides a framework for understanding the molecular mechanism of LCT cellular intoxication.

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 score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations149
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchFrench-language works237,207