MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063591374 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0511062103

Proteomic analysis of adaptor protein 1A coats selectively assembled on liposomes

2006· article· en· W2063591374 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Thorsten Baust, Cornelia Czupalla, Eberhard Krause, Line Bourel‐Bonnet, Bernard Hoflack

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular transport and secretion
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsTechnische Universität DresdenDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsTransmembrane proteinCell biologyMembrane proteinADP ribosylation factorGTPaseClathrin adaptor proteinsBiologyEffectorSignal transducing adaptor proteinProtein targetingTransmembrane domainLiposomeProteomicsLipid bilayerClathrinBiochemistryMembraneVesicleSignal transductionReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coat components localize to specific membrane domains, where they sort selected transmembrane proteins. To study how clathrin coats are stabilized on such domains and to identify the protein networks involved, we combined proteomic screens and in vitro liposome-based assays that recapitulate the fidelity of protein sorting in vivo. Our study identifying approximately 40 proteins on AP-1A-coated liposomes revealed that AP-1A coat assembly triggers the concomitant recruitment of Rac1, its effectors, and the Wave/Scar complex as well as that of Rab11 and Rab14. The coordinated recruitment of these different machineries requires a mosaic of membrane components comprising the GTPase ADP-ribosylation factor 1, sorting signals in selected transmembrane proteins, and phosphatidylinositol 4-phosphate. These results demonstrate that the combinatorial use of low-affinity binding sites present on the same membrane domain accounts not only for a selective coat assembly but also for the coordinated assembly of selected machineries required for actin polymerization and subsequent membrane fusion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations52
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicCellular transport and secretionFrench-language works237,207