Eukaryotic Protein Domains as Functional Units of Cellular Evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modular protein domains are functional units that can be modified through the acquisition of new intrinsic activities or by the formation of novel domain combinations, thereby contributing to the evolution of proteins with new biological properties. Here, we assign proteins to groups with related domain compositions and functional properties, termed "domain clubs," which we use to compare multiple eukaryotic proteomes. This analysis shows that different domain types can take distinct evolutionary trajectories, which correlate with the conservation, gain, expansion, or decay of particular biological processes. Evolutionary jumps are associated with a domain that coordinately acquires a new intrinsic function and enters new domain clubs, thereby providing the modified domain with access to a new cellular microenvironment. We also coordinately analyzed the covalent and noncovalent interactions of different domain types to assess the molecular compartment occupied by each domain. This reveals that specific subsets of domains demarcate particular cellular processes, such as growth factor signaling, chromatin remodeling, apoptotic and inflammatory responses, or vesicular trafficking. We suggest that domains, and the proteins in which they reside, are selected during evolution through reciprocal interactions with protein domains in their local microenvironment. Based on this scheme, we propose a mechanism by which Tudor domains may have evolved to support different modes of epigenetic regulation and suggest a role for the germline group of mammalian Tudor domains in Piwi-regulated RNA biology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".