Analysis of binding of the family 2a carbohydrate-binding module from Cellulomonas fimi xylanase 10A to cellulose: specificity and identification of functionally important amino acid residues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The family 2a carbohydrate-binding module (CBM2a) of xylanase 10A from Cellulomonas fimi binds to the crystalline regions of cellulose. It does not share binding sites with the N-terminal family 4 binding module (CBM4-1) from the cellulase 9B from C.fimi, a module that binds strictly to soluble sugars and amorphous cellulose. The binding of CBM2a to crystalline matrices is mediated by several residues on the binding face, including three prominent, solvent-exposed tryptophan residues. Binding to crystalline cellulose was analyzed by making a series of conservative (phenylalanine and tyrosine) and non-conservative substitutions (alanine) of each solvent-exposed tryptophan (W17, W54 and W72). Other residues on the binding face with hydrogen bonding potential were substituted with alanine. Each tryptophan plays a different role in binding; a tryptophan is essential at position 54, a tyrosine or tryptophan at position 17 and any aromatic residue at position 72. Other residues on the binding face, with the exception of N15, are not essential determinants of binding affinity. Given the specificity of CBM2a, the structure of crystalline cellulose and the dynamic nature of the binding of CBM2a, we propose a model for the interaction between the polypeptide and the crystalline surface.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".