CXC and CC Chemokines Form Mixed Heterodimers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CXC and CC chemokines are involved in numerous biological processes, and their function in situ may be significantly influenced by heterodimer formation, as was recently reported, for example, for CXC chemokines CXCL4/PF4 and CXCL8/IL8 that interact to form heterodimers that modulate chemotactic and cell proliferation activities. Here we used molecular dynamics simulations to determine relative association free energies (overall average and per residue) for homo- and heterodimer pairs of CXC (CXCL4/PF4, CXCL8/IL8, CXCL1/Gro-alpha, and CXCL7/NAP-2) and CC (CCL5/RANTES, CCL2/MCP-1, and CCL8/MCP-2) chemokines. Even though structural homology among monomer folds of all CXC and CC chemokines permits heterodimer assembly, our calculated association free energies depend upon the particular pair of chemokines in terms of the net electrostatic and nonelectrostatic forces involved, as well as (for CC/CXC mixed chemokines) the selection of dimer type (CC or CXC). These relative free energies indicate that association of some pairs of chemokines is more favorable than others. Our approach is validated by correlation of calculated and experimentally determined free energies. Results are discussed in terms of CXC and CC chemokine function and have significant biological implications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".