MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116903147 · doi:10.1242/jcs.113.11.1883

N-terminal targeting of guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEF) for ADP ribosylation factors (ARF) to the Golgi

2000· article· en· W2116903147 on OpenAlexaff
Stella Y. Lee, Bill Pohajdak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular transport and secretion
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleckstrin homology domainADP ribosylation factorGuanine nucleotide exchange factorGolgi apparatusBiologyGolgi membraneCoiled coilC-terminusCell biologyBiochemistryNucleotideProtein domainAmino acidEndoplasmic reticulumPhosphorylationGTPaseGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

B2-1 (cytohesin-1) is a member of a group of proteins (including ARNO and ARNO3) that are all of similar size and domain composition. The three proteins contain an N-terminal coiled-coil domain, followed by a Sec7 and a pleckstrin homology (PH) domain. While it is well established that the Sec7 domain functions as a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) for ADP-ribosylation factors (ARFs) and the PH domain anchors the proteins to membrane phosphoinositols, the function of the N-terminal domain is unknown. Here we show that the N terminus of B2-1 (residues 1-54) is necessary and sufficient to target the protein to the Golgi. The Sec7+PH domains of B2-1 (residues 55-398) are not sufficient for Golgi localization. Further deletion analysis and point mutagenesis indicate that the coiled-coil domain within the N terminus is responsible for Golgi targeting. Furthermore, ARNO and ARNO3 N termini also have the same capability of targeting to the Golgi. We conclude that the N-terminal, (&agr;)-helical, coiled-coil domain is used to target this family of proteins to the Golgi complex.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicCellular transport and secretionFrench-language works237,207