Aggregation and Amyloid Fibril Formation Induced by Chemical Dimerization of Recombinant Prion Protein in Physiological-like Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prion diseases are caused by the conversion of a cellular protein (PrP(C)) into a misfolded, aggregated isoform (PrP(Res)). Misfolding of recombinant PrP(C) in the absence of PrP(Res) template, cellular factors, denaturing agents, or at neutral pH has not been achieved. A number of studies indicate that dimerization of PrP(C) may be a key step in the aggregation process. In an effort to understand the molecular event that may activate misfolding of PrP(C) in more relevant physiological conditions, we tested if enforced dimerization of PrP(C) may induce a conformational change reminiscent of the conversion of PrP(C) to PrP(Res). We used a well described inducible dimerization strategy whereby a chimeric PrP(C) composed of a modified FK506-binding protein (Fv) fused with PrP(C) and termed Fv-PrP is incubated in the presence of a monomeric FK506 or dimerizing AP20187 ligand. Addition of AP20187 but not FK506 to recombinant Fv-PrP (rFv-PrP) in physiological-like conditions resulted in a rapid conformational change characterized by an increase in beta-sheet structure and simultaneous aggregation of the protein. Aggregates were partially resistant to proteinase K and induced the conversion of soluble rFv-PrP in serial seeding experiments. As judged from thioflavin T binding and electron microscopy, aggregates converted to amyloid fibers. Aggregates were toxic to cultured cells, whereas soluble rFv-PrP and amyloid fibers were harmless. This study strongly supports the proposition that dimerization of PrP(C) is a key pathological primary event in the conversion of PrP(C) and may initiate the pathogenesis of prion diseases.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".