Cloning, sequence analysis, and expression of cDNA coding for the major house dust mite allergen, Der f 1, in Escherichia coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our objective was to clone, express and characterize adult Dermatophagoides farinae group 1 (Der f 1) allergens to further produce recombinant allergens for future clinical applications in order to eliminate side reactions from crude extracts of mites. Based on GenBank data, we designed primers and amplified the cDNA fragment coding for Der f 1 by nested-PCR. After purification and recovery, the cDNA fragment was cloned into the pMD19-T vector. The fragment was then sequenced, subcloned into the plasmid pET28a(+), expressed in Escherichia coli BL21 and identified by Western blotting. The cDNA coding for Der f 1 was cloned, sequenced and expressed successfully. Sequence analysis showed the presence of an open reading frame containing 966 bp that encodes a protein of 321 amino acids. Interestingly, homology analysis showed that the Der p 1 shared more than 87% identity in amino acid sequence with Eur m 1 but only 80% with Der f 1. Furthermore, phylogenetic analyses suggested that D. pteronyssinus was evolutionarily closer to Euroglyphus maynei than to D. farinae, even though D. pteronyssinus and D. farinae belong to the same Dermatophagoides genus. A total of three cysteine peptidase active sites were found in the predicted amino acid sequence, including 127-138 (QGGCGSCWAFSG), 267-277 (NYHAVNIVGYG) and 284-303 (YWIVRNSWDTTWGDSGYGYF). Moreover, secondary structure analysis revealed that Der f 1 contained an a helix (33.96%), an extended strand (17.13%), a ss turn (5.61%), and a random coil (43.30%). A simple three-dimensional model of this protein was constructed using a Swiss-model server. The cDNA coding for Der f 1 was cloned, sequenced and expressed successfully. Alignment and phylogenetic analysis suggests that D. pteronyssinus is evolutionarily more similar to E. maynei than to D. farinae.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".