Lymnaea EGF and Gigantoxin I, Novel Invertebrate Members of the Epidermal Growth Factor Family
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review, we compare the sequence and structural relationships of two epidermal growth factor (EGF) family related proteins that have recently been discovered in invertebrate species. The first is L-EGF, a secreted growth factor from the gastropod mollusk Lymnaea stagnalis. The second is a peptide toxin (Gigantoxin I), isolated from the sea anenome Stichodactyla giganteus, which can paralyze crabs. L-EGF and Gigantoxin I share striking sequence similarity with mammalian erbB1 receptor ligands, including most of the essential receptor binding sites. Intriguingly, L-EGF's tertiary structure resembles more the structure of the EGF-like domain of coagulation factors. That is, the secondary and tertiary structure of L-EGF indicates the presence of a double-stranded beta-sheet but also suggests that this protein, in contrast to all other erbB1 ligands, contains a calcium-binding domain. One of the most remarkable features of L-EGF and Gigantoxin I however, is the indication that these protein are synthesized as non-membrane bound secreted peptides. This feature sets L-EGF and Gigantoxin I apart from all other members of the EGF family or EGF-like proteins identified thus far. We discuss sequence similarities and dissimilarities in the light of indications that, despite the more than 600 million years of phylogenetic distance separating both these invertebrates from mammals, Gigantoxin I and L-EGF retain some affinity for the mammalian erbB-family of receptors. Considering that mammalian EGF and its family members are frequently implicated in neoplastic diseases, the increasing number of identified and characterized invertebrate EGF family members may provide valuable leads in the design of erbB receptor antagonists.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".