The Structure of the Catalytic Domain of a Plant Cellulose Synthase and Its Assembly into Dimers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellulose microfibrils are para-crystalline arrays of several dozen linear (1→4)-β-d-glucan chains synthesized at the surface of the cell membrane by large, multimeric complexes of synthase proteins. Recombinant catalytic domains of rice (Oryza sativa) CesA8 cellulose synthase form dimers reversibly as the fundamental scaffold units of architecture in the synthase complex. Specificity of binding to UDP and UDP-Glc indicates a properly folded protein, and binding kinetics indicate that each monomer independently synthesizes single glucan chains of cellulose, i.e., two chains per dimer pair. In contrast to structure modeling predictions, solution x-ray scattering studies demonstrate that the monomer is a two-domain, elongated structure, with the smaller domain coupling two monomers into a dimer. The catalytic core of the monomer is accommodated only near its center, with the plant-specific sequences occupying the small domain and an extension distal to the catalytic domain. This configuration is in stark contrast to the domain organization obtained in predicted structures of plant CesA. The arrangement of the catalytic domain within the CesA monomer and dimer provides a foundation for constructing structural models of the synthase complex and defining the relationship between the rosette structure and the cellulose microfibrils they synthesize.
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 | 0.001 |
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".