Determining Pax‐5 and hnRNP A1 protein interacting domains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pax‐5 is a key regulator of B lymphocyte development, and is known to interact directly or indirectly with a large number of protein partners. In order to identify proteins that interact directly with Pax‐5, a yeast‐two hybrid assay was performed using Pax‐5 as bait. A novel interaction between Pax‐5 and human nuclear ribonucleoprotein A1 (hnRNP A1) was identified. As hnRNP A1 is a protein involved in RNA processing and could influence Pax‐5‐ mediated transcription of its downstream targets, we decided to further characterize this protein‐protein interaction. In order to identify domains of the Pax‐5 protein that are necessary for interaction with hnRNP A1, cells expressing truncated Pax‐5 peptides were immunoprecipitated with an hnRNP A1 antibody, and precipitates were immunoblotted with a Pax‐5 antibody. Our findings reveal that the point of contact between the two proteins is located in the Pax‐5 octapeptide domain. Further, site‐directed mutagenesis of Pax‐5, within the octapeptide domain, has identified the specific amino acids required for binding of the hnRNP A1 protein. We are investigating the possible roles of this novel protein interaction. This research is supported by a Canadian Institute of Health Research (RPP) Grant and an Atlantic Innovation Fund Grant to RJO.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".