MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138579861 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0508259102

A model of anthrax toxin lethal factor bound to protective antigen

2005· article· en· W2138579861 on OpenAlexaff
D. Borden Lacy, Henry C. Lin, Roman A. Melnyk, Ora Schueler‐Furman, Laura Reither, Kristina Cunningham, David Baker, R. John Collier

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacillus and Francisella bacterial research
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsAnthrax toxinMutagenesisDocking (animal)ToxinBacillus anthracisEnzymeChemistryAntigenVirulence factorBiophysicsBiochemistryBiologyMutationRecombinant DNAFusion proteinGeneticsVirulenceBacteriaMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthrax toxin is made up of three proteins: the edema factor (EF), lethal factor (LF) enzymes, and the multifunctional protective antigen (PA). Proteolytically activated PA heptamerizes, binds the EF/LF enzymes, and forms a pore that allows for EF/LF passage into host cells. Using directed mutagenesis, we identified three LF-PA contact points defined by a specific disulfide crosslink and two pairs of complementary charge-reversal mutations. These contact points were consistent with the lowest energy LF-PA complex found by using Rosetta protein-protein docking. These results illustrate how biochemical and computational methods can be combined to produce reliable models of large complexes. The model shows that EF and LF bind through a highly electrostatic interface, with their flexible N-terminal region positioned at the entrance of the heptameric PA pore and thus poised to initiate translocation in an N- to C-terminal direction.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations61
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicBacillus and Francisella bacterial researchFrench-language works237,207