The Long and Short Flavodoxins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flavodoxins are well known one-domain alpha/beta electron-transfer proteins that, according to the presence or absence of a approximately 20-residue loop splitting the fifth beta-strand of the central beta-sheet, have been classified in two groups: long and short-chain flavodoxins, respectively. Although the flavodoxins have been extensively used as models to study electron transfer, ligand binding, protein stability and folding issues, the role of the loop has not been investigated. We have constructed two shortened versions of the long-chain Anabaena flavodoxin in which the split beta-strand has been spliced to remove the original loop. The two variants have been carefully analyzed using various spectroscopic and hydrodynamic criteria, and one of them is clearly well folded, indicating that the long loop is a peripheral element of the structure of long flavodoxins. However, the removal of the loop (which is not in contact with the cofactor in the native structure) markedly decreases the affinity of the apoflavodoxin-FMN complex. This seems related to the fact that, in long flavodoxins, the adjacent tyrosine-bearing FMN binding loop (which is longer and thus more flexible than in short flavodoxins) is stabilized in its competent conformation by interactions with the excised loop. The modest role played by the long loop of long flavodoxins in the structure of these proteins (and in its conformational stability, see Lopez-Llano, J., Maldonado, S., Jain, S., Lostao, A., Godoy-Ruiz, R., Sanchez-Ruiz, Cortijo, M., Fernandez-Recio, J., and Sancho, J. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 47184-47191) opens the possibility that its conservation in so many species is related to a functional role yet to be discovered. In this respect, we discuss the possibility that the long loop is involved in the recognition of some flavodoxin partners. In addition, we report on a structural feature of flavodoxins that could indicate that the short flavodoxins derive from the long ones.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".