Acquisition of a Leucine Zipper Motif as a Mechanism of Antimorphy for an Allele of the<i>Drosophila Hox</i>Gene<i>Sex Combs Reduced</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1932, Müller first used the term "antimorphic" to describe mutant alleles that have an effect that is antagonistic to that of the wild-type allele from which they were derived. In a previous characterization of mutant alleles of the Drosophila melanogaster Hox gene, Sex combs reduced (Scr), we identified the missense, antimorphic allele Scr(14), which is a Ser10-to-Leu change in the N-terminally located, bilateran-specific octapeptide motif. Here we propose that the cause of Scr(14) antimorphy is the acquisition of a leucine zipper oligomerization motif spanning the octapeptide motif and adjacently located protostome-specific LASCY motif. Analysis of the primary and predicted secondary structures of the SCR N-terminus suggests that while the SCR(+) encodes a short, α-helical region containing one putative heptad repeat, the same region in SCR(14) encodes a longer, α-helical region containing two putative heptad repeats. In addition, in vitro cross-linking assays demonstrated strong oligomerization of SCR(14) but not SCR(+). For in vivo sex comb formation, we observed reciprocal inhibition of endogenous SCR(+) and SCR(14) activity by ectopic expression of truncated SCR(14) and SCR(+) peptides, respectively. The acquisition of an oligomerization domain in SCR(14) presents a novel mechanism of antimorphy relative to the dominant negative mechanism, which maintains oligomerization between the wild-type and mutant protein subunits.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".