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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.002

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 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

Citations61
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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