MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110655079 · doi:10.1002/jmr.2469

A comparative structure-function analysis of active-site inhibitors of<i>Vibrio cholerae</i>cholix toxin

2015· article· en· W2110655079 on OpenAlexafffund
Miguel R. Lugo, A. Rod Merrill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular Recognition · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVibrio bacteria research studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsVibrio choleraeCholera toxinToxinMicrobiologyFunction (biology)BiologyComputational biologyChemistryBacteriaCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cholix toxin from Vibrio cholerae is a novel mono-ADP-ribosyltransferase (mART) toxin that shares structural and functional properties with Pseudomonas aeruginosa exotoxin A and Corynebacterium diphtheriae diphtheria toxin. Herein, we have used the high-resolution X-ray structure of full-length cholix toxin in the apo form, NAD(+) bound, and 10 structures of the cholix catalytic domain (C-domain) complexed with several strong inhibitors of toxin enzyme activity (NAP, PJ34, and the P-series) to study the binding mode of the ligands. A pharmacophore model based on the active pose of NAD(+) was compared with the active conformation of the inhibitors, which revealed a cationic feature in the side chain of the inhibitors that may determine the active pose. Moreover, a conformational search was conducted for the missing coordinates of one of the main active-site loops (R-loop). The resulting structural models were used to evaluate the interaction energies and for 3D-QSAR modeling. Implications for a rational drug design approach for mART toxins were derived.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular RecognitionSame topicVibrio bacteria research studiesFrench-language works237,207