Mass Spectrometry of Native Rat Amelogenins: Primary Transcripts, Secretory Isoforms, and C-terminal Degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloning technologies have established unambiguously that amelogenins always seem larger in molecular weight (Mr) by gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) than by mass spectrometry (MS). This has caused many problems relating cloned versions of amelogenin to proteins actually secreted by ameloblasts in vivo. In this study, discrete protein fractions at 31-20 kDa (Mr(SDS)) were prepared from freeze-dried rat incisor enamel by techniques optimized for preserving protein integrity. N-terminal sequence and amino acid compositional analyses indicated that the major protein forming these fractions was amelogenin. As expected, the molecular weights estimated by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) and electrospray ionization (ESI) MS were significantly less than their apparent molecular weights estimated by SDS-PAGE. Plots of Mr(SDS) vs. Mr(MS) for all fractions showed high linear correlation (r = 0.992). Analysis of MS data further indicated that the major protein in the 27-kDa fraction corresponded to the R180 secretory isoform of rat amelogenin, whereas some minor proteins in the 23-kDa fraction likely corresponded to a R156 secretory isoform. This was in contrast to major proteins forming the 25-, 24-, and 23-kDa fractions (Mr(SDS)), which seemed to represent proteolytic fragments of R180 progressively altered at the P169-A170, P164-L165, and F151-S152 C-terminal cleavage sites, respectively. Proteins in the 20-kDa fraction (Mr(SDS)) most closely matched by ESI-MS fragments of the R156 secretory isoform that were C-terminally-modified at the equivalent P164-L165 site.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".