Multisite phosphorylation of Pin1-associated mitotic phosphoproteins revealed by monoclonal antibodies MPM-2 and CC-3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The peptidyl-prolyl isomerase Pin1 recently revealed itself as a new player in the regulation of protein function by phosphorylation. Pin1 isomerizes the peptide bond of specific phosphorylated serine or threonine residues preceding proline in several proteins involved in various cellular events including mitosis, transcription, differentiation and DNA damage response. Many Pin1 substrates are antigens of the phosphodependent monoclonal antibody MPM-2, which reacts with a subset of proteins phosphorylated at the G2/M transition. RESULTS: As MPM-2 is not a general marker of mitotic phosphoproteins, and as most mitotic substrates are phosphorylated more than once, we used a different phosphodependent antibody, mAb CC-3, to identify additional mitotic phosphoproteins and eventual Pin1 substrates by combining affinity purification, MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and immunoblotting. Most CC-3-reactive phosphoproteins appeared to be known or novel MPM-2 antigens and included the RNA-binding protein p54nrb/nmt55, the spliceosomal protein SAP155, the Ki-67 antigen, MAP-1B, DNA topoisomerases II alpha and beta, the elongation factor hSpt5 and the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II. The CC-3 mitotic antigens were also shown to be Pin1 targets. The fine CC-3- and MPM-2-epitope mapping of the RNA polymerase II carboxy-terminal domain confirmed that the epitopes were different and could be generated in vitro by distinct kinases. Finally, the post-mitotic dephosphorylation of both CC-3 and MPM-2 antigens was prevented when cellular Pin1 activity was blocked by the selective inhibitor juglone. CONCLUSION: These observations indicate that the mitotic phosphoproteins associated with Pin1 are phosphorylated on multiple sites, suggesting combinatorial regulation of substrate recognition and isomerization.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".