Expressing the human proteome for affinity proteomics: optimising expression of soluble protein domains and in vivo biotinylation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The generation of affinity reagents to large numbers of human proteins depends on the ability to express the target proteins as high-quality antigens. The Structural Genomics Consortium (SGC) focuses on the production and structure determination of human proteins. In a 7-year period, the SGC has deposited crystal structures of >800 human protein domains, and has additionally expressed and purified a similar number of protein domains that have not yet been crystallised. The targets include a diversity of protein domains, with an attempt to provide high coverage of protein families. The family approach provides an excellent basis for characterising the selectivity of affinity reagents. We present a summary of the approaches used to generate purified human proteins or protein domains, a test case demonstrating the ability to rapidly generate new proteins, and an optimisation study on the modification of >70 proteins by biotinylation in vivo. These results provide a unique synergy between large-scale structural projects and the recent efforts to produce a wide coverage of affinity reagents to the human proteome.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".