MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029194880 · doi:10.1002/cbic.201402414

Evaluation of the Calmodulin‐SOX9 Interaction by “Magnetic Fishing” Coupled to Mass Spectrometry

2014· article· en· W2029194880 on OpenAlexafffund
Meghan J. McFadden, Todd Hryciw, Arthur Brown, M.S. Junop, John D. Brennan

Bibliographic record

VenueChemBioChem · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal Abnormalities
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCalmodulinMelittinBinding siteChemistryBinding domainCalmodulin-binding proteinsMass spectrometryPlasma protein bindingBiophysicsBinding proteinBiochemistryBiologyPeptideGeneEnzymeChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disruption of calmodulin (CaM)-based protein interactions has been touted as a potential means for modulating several disease pathways. Among these is SOX9, which is a DNA binding protein that is involved in chrondrocyte differentiation and regulation of the hormones that control sexual development. In this work, we employed a "magnetic fishing"/mass spectrometry assay in conjunction with intrinsic fluorescence to examine the interaction of CaM with the CaM-binding domain of SOX9 (SOX-CAL), and to assess the modulation of this interaction by known anti-CaM compounds. Our data show that there is a high affinity interaction between CaM and SOX-CAL (27±9 nM), and that SOX-CAL bound to the same location as the well-known CaM antagonist melittin; unexpectedly, we also found that addition of CaM-binding small molecules initially produced increased SOX-CAL binding, indicative of binding to both the well-known high-affinity CaM binding site and a second, lower-affinity binding site.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemBioChemSame topicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal AbnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207