MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploring the Mechanism of Acyl Carrier Protein Interactions and Acyl Transfer

2011· article· en· W2287472001 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter Murphy, Gerrit Volkman, Elden Rowland, Xiang‐Qin Liu, David M. Byers

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAcyl carrier proteinChemistryEnzymeBiochemistryStereochemistryFatty acidHelix (gastropod)AcylationBiologyBiosynthesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As an essential protein in bacterial fatty acid synthesis, acyl carrier protein (ACP) is an attractive anti‐microbial drug target. The three‐dimensional structure of ACP is comprised of three main parallel α–helices, which create a hydrophobic binding pocket that encloses a fatty acyl chain when attached. ACP interacts with most partner enzymes through the acidic helix II, but the exact mechanism of interaction and acyl transfer to a partner enzyme is poorly understood. For acyl transfer to occur, we hypothesize that a conformational change is required. To examine this requirement, we have analyzed a cyclic version of Vibrio harveyi ACP created by split‐intein technology (Volkmann, et al . (2010) JBC 285 : 8605) using molecular dynamics, mass spectrometry, tryptophan fluorescence, and other biophysical techniques. We have demonstrated that cyclic ACP is more thermodynamically stable than wild‐type linear ACP. Furthermore, we show that cyclic ACP is able to act as a substrate for holo‐ACP synthase, yielding a cyclic ACP capable of carrying fatty acids. (Supported by NSERC and an NSHRF Student Research Award)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207