MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079235669 · doi:10.1021/bi2013883

Structural Analysis of HopPmaL Reveals the Presence of a Second Adaptor Domain Common to the HopAB Family of <i>Pseudomonas syringae</i> Type III Effectors

2011· article· en· W2079235669 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex U. Singer, Bin Wu, Adelinda Yee, Scott Houliston, Xiaohui Xu, Hong Cui, T. Skarina, Maite Garcia, Anthony Semesi, C.H. Arrowsmith, Alexei Savchenko

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersArgonne National LaboratoryNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPseudomonas syringaeEffectorDomain (mathematical analysis)Type (biology)Signal transducing adaptor proteinPseudomonasMicrobiologyBiologyChemistryPathogenGeneticsCell biologyBacteriaSignal transductionMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HopPmaL is a member of the HopAB family of type III effectors present in the phytopathogen Pseudomonas syringae. Using both X-ray crystallography and solution nuclear magnetic resonance, we demonstrate that HopPmaL contains two structurally homologous yet functionally distinct domains. The N-terminal domain corresponds to the previously described Pto-binding domain, while the previously uncharacterised C-terminal domain spans residues 308-385. While structurally similar, these domains do not share significant sequence similarity and most importantly demonstrate significant differences in key residues involved in host protein recognition, suggesting that each of them targets a different host protein.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistrySame topicPlant-Microbe Interactions and ImmunityFrench-language works237,207