Mutations in Domain I Interhelical Loops Affect the Rate of Pore Formation by the <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i> Cry1Aa Toxin in Insect Midgut Brush Border Membrane Vesicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pore formation in the apical membrane of the midgut epithelial cells of susceptible insects constitutes a key step in the mode of action of Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal toxins. In order to study the mechanism of toxin insertion into the membrane, at least one residue in each of the pore-forming-domain (domain I) interhelical loops of Cry1Aa was replaced individually by cysteine, an amino acid which is normally absent from the activated Cry1Aa toxin, using site-directed mutagenesis. The toxicity of most mutants to Manduca sexta neonate larvae was comparable to that of Cry1Aa. The ability of each of the activated mutant toxins to permeabilize M. sexta midgut brush border membrane vesicles was examined with an osmotic swelling assay. Following a 1-h preincubation, all mutants except the V150C mutant were able to form pores at pH 7.5, although the W182C mutant had a weaker activity than the other toxins. Increasing the pH to 10.5, a procedure which introduces a negative charge on the thiol group of the cysteine residues, caused a significant reduction in the pore-forming abilities of most mutants without affecting those of Cry1Aa or the I88C, T122C, Y153C, or S252C mutant. The rate of pore formation was significantly lower for the F50C, Q151C, Y153C, W182C, and S252C mutants than for Cry1Aa at pH 7.5. At the higher pH, all mutants formed pores significantly more slowly than Cry1Aa, except the I88C mutant, which formed pores significantly faster, and the T122C mutant. These results indicate that domain I interhelical loop residues play an important role in the conformational changes leading to toxin insertion and pore formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".