Correction: Plasticity of Intermediate Filament Subunits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intermediate filaments (IFs) assembled in vitro from recombinantly expressed proteins have a diameter of 8-12 nm and can reach several micrometers in length.IFs assemble from a soluble pool of subunits, tetramers in the case of vimentin.Upon salt addition, the subunits form first unit length filaments (ULFs) within seconds and then assembly proceeds further by endto-end fusion of ULFs and short filaments.So far, IF subunits have mainly been observed by electron microscopy of glycerol sprayed and rotary metal shadowed specimens.Due to the shear forces during spraying the IF subunits appear generally as straight thin rods.In this study, we used atomic force microscopy (AFM), cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) combined with molecular modeling to investigate the conformation of the subunits of vimentin, desmin and keratin K5/K14 IFs in various conditions.Due to their anisotropic shape the subunits are difficult to image at high resolution by cryo-EM.In order to enhance contrast we used a cryo-negative staining approach.The subunits were clearly identified as thin, slightly curved rods.However the staining agent also forced the subunits to aggregate into two-dimensional networks of dot-like structures.To test this conformational change further, we imaged dried unfixed subunits on mica by AFM revealing a mixture of extended and dot-like conformations.The use of divalent ions such as calcium and magnesium, as well as glutaraldehyde exposure favored compact conformations over elongated ones.These experimental results as well as coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations of a vimentin tetramer highlight the plasticity of IF subunits.
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 | 0.003 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.144 | 0.050 |
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".