MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312823526 · doi:10.1107/s0108767308091320

Structural and mutational studies of anthocyanin malonyltransferases

2008· article· en· W2312823526 on OpenAlexaff
Hideaki Unno, F. Ichimaida, Haruo Suzuki, Sho Takahashi, Yoko Tanaka, Ayumu Saito, Tomoko Nishino, Masami Kusunoki, Tatsuo Nakayama

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations of Crystallography · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Gene Expression Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthocyaninGeneticsComputational biologyBiologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4 4 is a key player in the formation of large complexes on gene promoters leading to chromatin remodelling and gene activation. CARM1 has now been shown to methylate a large variety of proteins which are all vital to gene expression. CARM1 contains 608 amino acids in human and its architecture has been schematically divided into three domains. CARM1 is built around a catalytic core domain that is well conserved in sequence (and therefore in structure) among all PRMTs members. CARM1 possesses two unique additional domains attached, respectively, at the NH2-terminal and at the COOH-terminal end of the PRMT active site. Both NH2-terminal domain and COOHterminal domain have been shown to be required for the coactivator function of human CARM1. We have solved six crystal structures corresponding to three isolated modules of CARM1. Five crystal structures of the CARM1 catalytic module, two free, two cofactor and one inhibitor bound forms have revealed large structural modifications and shown that the NH2-terminal and the COOHterminal end of CARM1 catalytic module contain molecular switches that may inspire how CARM1 regulates its biological activities by protein-protein interactions. Full detailed analysis of the structures will be presented.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations of CrystallographySame topicPlant Gene Expression AnalysisFrench-language works237,207