MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123865368 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0500737102

Signal peptide–chaperone interactions on the twin-arginine protein transport pathway

2005· article· en· W2123865368 on OpenAlexaff
Kostas Hatzixanthis, Thomas A. Clarke, Arthur Oubrie, David J. Richardson, Raymond J. Turner, Frank Sargent

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEnzyme Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
KeywordsProofreadingChaperone (clinical)Signal peptideBiochemistryBiologyPeptideTwin-arginine translocation pathwayPeptide sequenceCell biologyEnzymeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The twin-arginine transport (Tat) system is a protein-targeting pathway of prokaryotes and chloroplasts. Most Escherichia coli Tat substrates are complex metalloenzymes that must be correctly folded and assembled before transport, and a preexport chaperone-mediated "proofreading" process is therefore in operation. The paradigm proofreading chaperone is TorD, which coordinates maturation and export of the key respiratory enzyme trimethylamine N-oxide reductase (TorA). It is demonstrated here that purified TorD binds tightly and with exquisite specificity to the TorA twin-arginine signal peptide in vitro. It is also reported that the TorD family constitutes a hitherto unexpected class of nucleotide-binding proteins. The affinity of TorD for GTP is enhanced by initial signal peptide binding, and it is proposed that GTP governs signal peptide binding-and-release cycles during Tat proofreading.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations85
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicEnzyme Structure and FunctionFrench-language works237,207