Comparative Analysis of Metal Binding Characteristicsof Copper Chaperone Proteins, Atx1 and ATOX1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The metal binding properties of the human copper chaperone ATOXI and its yeast homologue Atxl have been characterized. Complexes of these proteins with Cu(I), Ag (1), Cd(II) and Hg(II) were studied by native gel electrophoresis, chemical cross-linking followed by SDS-PAGE, as well as by size exclusion chromatography, mutagenesis and UV-visible absorption spectroscopy. Results indicate that binding of different metals to either ATOXI or Atxl altered conformation of subunit structure and the oligomerization state of the proteins. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that freshly reduced apoprotein is capable to convert Cu(ll) to Cu(l) stoichiometrically to the amount of protein present, while oxidized protein is only twenty per cent as active. Titration of Cu(ll) with either oxidized or reduced protein resulted in similar increase in absorbance at 254 nm, implicating Cu-thiolate formation in both forms of the protein, but titration with Ag(i) caused the increase in absorbance at 254 nm with the reduced protein only. These data indicate that Cu(1), Ag(1), Hg(ll) and Cd(ll) are all capable of binding to ATOXI and Atxl, but the characteristics of the binding to these copper chaperones differ for different metals.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".