Structure and pH‐induced alterations of recombinant and natural spider silk proteins in solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spinning process of spiders can modulate the mechanical properties of their silk fibers. It is therefore of primary importance to understand what are the key elements of the spider spinning process to develop efficient industrial spinning processes. We have exhaustively investigated the native conformation of major ampullate silk (MaS) proteins by comparing the content of the major ampullate gland of Nephila clavipes, solubilized MaS (SolMaS) fibers and the recombinant proteins rMaSpI and rMaSpII using (1) H solution NMR spectroscopy. The results indicate that the protein secondary structure is basically identical for the recombinant protein rMaSpI, SolMaS proteins, and the proteins in the dope, and corresponds to a disordered protein rich in 3(1) -helices. The data also show that glycine proton chemical shifts of rMaSpI and SolMaS are affected by pH, but that this change is not due to a modification of the secondary structure. Using a combination of NMR and dynamic light scattering, we have found that the spectral alteration of glycine is concomitant to a modification of the hydrodynamical diameter of recombinant and solubilized MaS. This led us to suggest new potential roles for the pH acidification in the spinning process of MaS proteins.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".