MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028642981 · doi:10.1083/jcb.148.2.353

A Role for Myosin-I in Actin Assembly through Interactions with Vrp1p, Bee1p, and the Arp2/3 Complex

2000· article· en· W2028642981 on OpenAlexaff
Marie Evangelista, Bert Klebl, Amy H.Y. Tong, Bradley A. Webb, Thomas Leeuw, Ekkehard Leberer, Malcolm Whiteway, David Y. Thomas, Charles Boone

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMyosinCell biologyActinSH3 domainActin-binding proteinActin remodelingEndocytosisProto-oncogene tyrosine-protein kinase SrcActin cytoskeletonBiochemistryCytoskeletonReceptorSignal transductionCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Type I myosins are highly conserved actin-based molecular motors that localize to the actin-rich cortex and participate in motility functions such as endocytosis, polarized morphogenesis, and cell migration. The COOH-terminal tail of yeast myosin-I proteins, Myo3p and Myo5p, contains an Src homology domain 3 (SH3) followed by an acidic domain. The myosin-I SH3 domain interacted with both Bee1p and Vrp1p, yeast homologues of human WASP and WIP, adapter proteins that link actin assembly and signaling molecules. The myosin-I acidic domain interacted with Arp2/3 complex subunits, Arc40p and Arc19p, and showed both sequence similarity and genetic redundancy with the COOH-terminal acidic domain of Bee1p (Las17p), which controls Arp2/3-mediated actin nucleation. These findings suggest that myosin-I proteins may participate in a diverse set of motility functions through a role in actin assembly.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations245
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207