Peroxin 5–peroxin 14 association in the protozoan <i>Leishmania donovani</i> involves a novel protein–protein interaction motif
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Import of proteins with a PTS1 (peroxisomal targeting signal 1) into the Leishmania glycosomal organelle involves docking of a PTS1-laden LdPEX5 [Leishmania donovani PEX5 (peroxin 5)] receptor to LdPEX14 on the surface of the glycosomal membrane. In higher eukaryotes, the PEX5-PEX14 interaction is mediated by a conserved diaromatic WXXXY/F motif. Site-directed and deletion mutageneses of the three WXXXY/F repeats in LdPEX5 did not abolish the LdPEX5-LdPEX14 association. Analysis of the equilibrium dissociation constant (K(d)) revealed that ldpex5-W53A (Trp53-->Ala), ldpex5-W293A, ldpex5-W176,293A and ldpex5-W53,176,293A mutant receptors were capable of binding LdPEX14 with affinities comparable with wild-type LdPEX5. That the diaromatic motifs were not required for the LdPEX5-LdPEX14 interaction was further verified by deletion analysis that showed that ldpex5 deletion mutants or ldpex5 fragments lacking the WXXXY/F motifs retained LdPEX14 binding activity. Mapping studies of LdPEX5 indicated that the necessary elements required for LdPEX14 association were localized to a region between residues 290 and 323. Finally, mutational analysis of LdPEX14 confirmed that residues 23-63, which encompass the conserved signature sequence AX2FLX7SPX6FLKGKGL/V present in all PEX14 proteins, are essential for LdPEX5 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".