Identification of a Critical Lysine Residue in Apolipoprotein B-100 That Mediates Noncovalent Interaction with Apolipoprotein(a)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have previously shown that lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) assembly involves an initial noncovalent interaction between sequences within apolipoprotein(a) (apo(a)) kringle IV types 5-8 and the amino terminus of apolipoprotein B-100 (sequences between amino acids 680 and 781 in apoB-100), followed by formation of a disulfide bond. In the present study, citraconylation of lysine residues in apoB-100 abolished the ability of the modified low density lipoprotein to associate with apo(a), thereby demonstrating a direct role for lysine residues in apoB in the first step of Lp(a) assembly. To identify specific lysine residues in the amino terminus of apoB that are required for the noncovalent interaction, we initially used an affinity chromatography method in which recombinant forms of apo(a) (r-apo(a)) were immobilized on Sepharose beads. Assessment of the ability of carboxyl-terminal truncations of apoB-18 to bind to r-apo(a)-Sepharose revealed that a 25-amino acid sequence in apoB (amino acids 680-704) bound specifically to apo(a) in a lysine-dependent manner; citraconylation of the lysine residues in the apoB derivative encoding this sequence abolished the binding interaction. Using fluorescence spectrometry, we found that a synthetic peptide corresponding to this sequence bound directly to apo(a); the peptide also reduced covalent Lp(a) formation. Lysine residues present in this sequence (Lys(680) and Lys(690)) were mutated to alanine in the context of apoB-18. We found that the apoB-18 species containing the Lys(680) mutation was incapable of binding to r-apo(a)-Sepharose columns, whereas the apoB-18 species containing the Lys(690) mutation exhibited slightly reduced binding to these columns. Taken together, our data indicate that Lys(680) is critical for the noncovalent interaction of apo(a) and apoB-100 that precedes covalent Lp(a) formation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".