Detergent binding explains anomalous SDS-PAGE migration of membrane proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migration on sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) that does not correlate with formula molecular weights, termed "gel shifting," appears to be common for membrane proteins but has yet to be conclusively explained. In the present work, we investigate the anomalous gel mobility of helical membrane proteins using a library of wild-type and mutant helix-loop-helix ("hairpin") sequences derived from transmembrane segments 3 and 4 of the human cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR), including disease-phenotypic residue substitutions. We find that these hairpins migrate at rates of -10% to +30% vs. their actual formula weights on SDS-PAGE and load detergent at ratios ranging from 3.4-10 g SDS/g protein. We additionally demonstrate that mutant gel shifts strongly correlate with changes in hairpin SDS loading capacity (R(2) = 0.8), and with hairpin helicity (R(2) = 0.9), indicating that gel shift behavior originates in altered detergent binding. In some cases, this differential solvation by SDS may result from replacing protein-detergent contacts with protein-protein contacts, implying that detergent binding and folding are intimately linked. The CF-phenotypic V232D mutant included in our library may thus disrupt CFTR function via altered protein-lipid interactions. The observed interdependence between hairpin migration, SDS aggregation number, and conformation additionally suggests that detergent binding may provide a rapid and economical screen for identifying membrane proteins with robust tertiary and/or quaternary structures.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".