MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073557526 · doi:10.1021/nn5007013

High Intrinsic Mechanical Flexibility of Mouse Prion Nanofibrils Revealed by Measurements of Axial and Radial Young’s Moduli

2014· article· en· W2073557526 on OpenAlexafffund
Guillaume Lamour, Calvin K. Yip, Hongbin Li, Jörg Gsponer

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPrion Diseases and Protein Misfolding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsModuliFlexibility (engineering)Materials scienceElastic modulusModulusComposite materialNanotechnologyPhysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-templated protein aggregation and intracerebral deposition of aggregates, sometimes in the form of amyloid fibrils, is a hallmark of mammalian prion diseases. What distinguishes amyloid fibrils formed by prions from those formed by other proteins is not clear. On the basis of previous studies on yeast prions that correlated high intrinsic fragmentation rates of fibrils with prion propagation efficiency, it has been hypothesized that the nanomechanical properties of prion amyloid such as strength and elastic modulus may be the distinguishing feature. Here, we reveal that fibrils formed by mammalian prions are relatively soft and clearly in a different class of rigidities when compared to nanofibrils formed by nonprions. We found that amyloid fibrils made of both wild-type and mutant mouse recombinant PrP(23-231) have remarkably low axial elastic moduli of 0.1-1.4 GPa. We demonstrate that even the proteinase K resistant core of these fibrils has similarly low intrinsic rigidities. Using a new mode of atomic force microscopy called AM-FM mode, we estimated the radial modulus of PrP fibrils at ∼0.6 GPa, consistent with the axial moduli derived by using an ensemble method. Our results have far-reaching implications for the understanding of protein-based infectivity and the design of amyloid biomaterials.

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)0.000
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations56
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicPrion Diseases and Protein MisfoldingFrench-language works237,207