MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045888807 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m007902200

NMR Analysis of Type III Antifreeze Protein Intramolecular Dimer

2001· article· en· W2045888807 on OpenAlexaff
Kazunori Miura, Satoru Ohgiya, Tamotsu Hoshino, Nobuaki Nemoto, T. Suetake, Ai Miura, Leo Spyracopoulos, Hidemasa Kondo, Sakae Tsuda

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntifreeze proteinIntramolecular forceDimerChemistryAntifreezeStereochemistryNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyBiochemistryBiophysicsBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structure of a new antifreeze protein (AFP) variant, RD3, from antarctic eel pout (Rhigophila dearborni) with enhanced activity has been determined for the first time by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. RD3 comprises a unique translational topology of two homologous type III AFP globular domains, each containing one flat, ice binding plane. The ice binding plane of the N domain is located approximately 3.5 A "behind" that of the C domain. The two ice binding planes are located laterally with an angle of 32 +/- 12 degrees between the planes. These results suggest that the C domain plane of RD3 binds first to the ice [1010] prism plane in the <0001> direction, which induces successive ice binding of the N domain in the <0101> direction. This manner of ice binding caused by the unique structural topology of RD3 is thought to be crucial for the significant enhancement of antifreeze activity, especially at low AFP 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 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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations50
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207