MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027319128 · doi:10.1002/pmic.200400991

Single‐step <b><i>Strep</i></b>‐tag® purification for the isolation and identification of protein complexes from mammalian cells

2005· article· en· W2027319128 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa R. Junttila, Susanna Saarinen, Thomas G.M. Schmidt, Juergen Kast, Jukka Westermarck

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffinity chromatographyProtein phosphatase 2Multiprotein complexProtein purificationIdentification (biology)Mass spectrometryBiologyElutionComputational biologyProteomicsTandem affinity purificationImmunoprecipitationBiochemistryIsolation (microbiology)FLAG-tagCell cultureChemistryChromatographyPhosphatasePhosphorylationBioinformaticsGeneticsEnzymeRecombinant DNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification of protein complexes is the key to understanding cellular functions. In this study, we present a novel method for the identification of multiprotein complexes from mammalian cells. By using the Strep-tag affinity chromatography method, enabling fast and simple one-step purification, coupled with competitive elution under physiological conditions, we successfully purified a PP2A holoenzyme protein complex from a cultured mammalian cancer cell line. We identified, by mass spectrometry, both known and novel interacting proteins for PP2A, and demonstrate that the purified PP2A complex is functional. The benefits and potential applications of the Strep-tag method for protein complex purification are discussed.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations119
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207