The Tic40 translocon components exhibit preferential interactions with different forms of the Oee1 plastid protein precursor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The transport of proteins across the plastid envelope involves a host of proteinaceous components that attend to varying structural needs of the process. This study focuses on interactions between two select forms (designated Tic40 and Toc36) of the Tic40-related components and different structural versions of the Oee1 precursor to dissect the components' mode of operation. Interaction profiling revealed several features pertaining to how Tic40-related components might work during the transport process. The main operational features revealed are: (1) Tic40 interacts preferentially with Oee1 precursors containing only the plastid-targeting domain, (2) Toc36 interacts preferentially with Oee1 precursors containing both plastid- and thylakoid lumen-targeting domains, (3)carboxyl truncations to either the entire Oee1 precursor or Toc36 affect interactions negatively, and (4) the general reduction of Tic40-related protein levels in transgenic plants appears to exert a greater negative impact on endogenous Oee1 levels than the other proteins assessed, a trend that corroborates the findings of the protein interaction experiments.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".