Auxiliary Ca<sup>2+</sup> binding sites can influence the structure of CIB1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent X-ray crystal structures and solution NMR spectroscopy data for calcium- and integrin-binding protein 1 (CIB1) have all revealed a common EF-hand domain structure for the protein. However, the orientation of the two protein domains, the oligomerization state, and the conformations of the N- and C-terminal extensions differ among the structures. In this study, we examine whether the binding of glutathione or auxiliary Ca(2+) ions as observed in the crystal structures, occur in solution, and whether these interactions can influence the structure or dimerization of CIB1. In addition, we test the potential phosphatase activity of CIB1, which was hypothesized based on the glutathione binding site geometry observed in one of the crystal structures of the protein. Biophysical and biochemical experiments failed to detect glutathione binding, protein dimerization, or phosphatase activity for CIB1 under several solution conditions. However, our data identify low affinity (K(d), 10(-2)M) Ca(2+) binding events that influence the structures of the N- and C-terminal extensions of CIB1 under high (300 mM) Ca(2+) crystallization conditions. In addition to providing a rationale for differences amongst the various solution and crystal structures of CIB1, our results show that the impact of low affinity Ca(2+) binding events should be considered when analyzing and interpreting protein crystallographic structures determined in the presence of very high Ca(2+) concentrations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".