Interaction between ErbB‐1 and ErbB‐2 transmembrane domains in bilayer membranes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transmembrane domains of ErbB receptor tyrosine kinases are monotopic helical structures proposed to be capable of direct side-to-side contact with related receptors. Formation of the resulting homo- or hetero-oligomeric complexes is considered a key step in ligand-mediated signalling. ErbB-2, which has not been observed to form active homo-dimers in a ligand dependent manner, has been implicated as an important partner for formation of hetero-dimers with other ErbB receptors. Recent work has shown that the ErbB-2 transmembrane domain is capable of forming homo-oligomeric species in lipid bilayers, while a similar domain from ErbB-1 appears to have a lesser tendency to such interactions. Here, 2H nuclear magnetic resonance was used to investigate the role of the ErbB-2 transmembrane domain in hetero-oligomerisation with that of ErbB-1. At low total concentrations of peptide in the membrane, ErbB-2 transmembrane domains were found to decrease the mobility of corresponding ErbB-1 domains. The results are consistent with the existence of direct transmembrane domain involvement in hetero-oligomer formation within the ErbB receptor family.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".