Delineation of the HLA-DR Region and the Residues Involved in the Association with the Cytoskeleton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas the association of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II molecules with the cytoskeleton and their recruitment into lipid rafts play a critical role during cognate T/antigen-presenting cell interactions, MHC class II-induced signals, regions, and residues involved in their association and recruitment have not yet been fully deciphered. In this study, we show that oligomerization of HLA-DR molecules induces their association with the cytoskeleton and their recruitment into lipid rafts. The association of oligomerized HLA-DR molecules with the cytoskeleton and their recruitment into lipid rafts occur independently. Furthermore, the association with the cytoskeleton is HLA-DR-specific, since oligomerization of HLA-DP triggers its recruitment only into lipid rafts. HLA-DR molecules devoid of both alpha and beta cytoplasmic tails did not associate with the cytoskeleton, but their recruitment into lipid rafts was unimpeded. Deletion of either the alpha or beta cytoplasmic tail did not affect the association of HLA-DR with the cytoskeleton and/or recruitment into lipid rafts. HLA-DR molecules that were devoid of the alpha cytoplasmic chain and that had their beta cytoplasmic chain replaced with the HLA-DP beta chain or with a beta chain in which the residues at positions Gly(226)-His(227)-Ser(228) were substituted by alanine no longer associated with the cytoskeleton. They were, however, still recruited into lipid rafts. Together, these results support the involvement of different regions of the cytoplasmic tails in the association and the recruitment of HLA-DR into different compartments. The differential behavior of HLA-DP and -DR with respect to their association with the cytoskeleton may explain the previously described difference in their transduced signals.
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".