Binding characteristics of a panel of monoclonal antibodies against the ligand binding domain of the human LDLr
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To obtain a panel of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) to study the folding and conformation of the low density lipoprotein receptor (LDLr), we have generated hybridomas from LDLr-deficient mice that had been immunized with the extracellular domain of the human LDLr. The 12 MAbs were specific for the ligand binding domain of the LDLr, with individual MAbs recognizing epitopes in ligand binding repeats 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. A subset of the MAbs failed to react with the LDLr when disulfide bonds were reduced, and one MAb, specific for an epitope that spans ligand binding repeats 1 and 2, recognized two conformational forms of the LDLr with different affinities. Antibodies specific for ligand binding repeats 3, 5, and 7 completely blocked the binding of LDL particles to the LDLr on cultured human fibroblasts, whereas MAbs with epitopes in ligand binding repeats 1 and 2 partially blocked the binding of LDL to the LDLr. These anti-LDLr MAbs will serve as useful probes for further analysis of LDLr conformation and LDLr-mediated lipoprotein binding.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".