MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314278169 · doi:10.1021/jp306993a

Comparative FTIR Study of a New Fungal Rhodopsin

2012· article· en· W2314278169 on OpenAlexaff
Hiroyasu Ito, M. Sumii, Akira Kawanabe, Ying Fan, Yuji Furutani, Leonid S. Brown, Hideki Kandori

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacteriorhodopsinHalorhodopsinRhodopsinFourier transform infrared spectroscopyAmino acidHydrogen bondMoleculeHalobacteriumChromophoreChemistryHalobacteriaceaeCrystallographyStereochemistryBiologyRetinalBiochemistryPhotochemistryMembraneHalobacterium salinarumPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bacteriorhodopsin (BR) is a light-driven proton pump of halophilic Archaea , and BR-like proton-pumping rhodopsins have been discovered in Bacteria and Eucarya as well. Leptosphaeria rhodopsin (LR) and Phaeosphaeria Rhodopsin 2 (PhaeoRD2) are both fungal rhodopsins in such a functional class, even though they belong to different branches of the phylogenetic tree. In this study, we compared light-induced structural changes in the K, L, and M photointermediates for PhaeoRD2, LR, and BR using low-temperature Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. We observed a strongly hydrogen-bonded water molecule in PhaeoRD2 (water O-D stretch in D(2)O at 2258 cm(-1)) as well as in LR and BR. This observation provided additional experimental evidence to the concept that strongly hydrogen-bonded water molecule is the functional determinant of light-driven proton pumping. The difference FTIR spectra for all the K, L, and M states are surprisingly similar between PhaeoRD2 and LR, but not for BR. PhaeoRD2 is more homologous to LR than to BR, but the difference is small. The amino acid identities between PhaeoRD2 and LR, and between PhaeoRD2 and BR are 34.5% and 30.2%, respectively. In addition, the amino acids uniquely identical for the fungal rhodopsins are located rather far from the retinal chromophore. In fact, the amino acid identities within 4 Å from retinal are the same among PhaeoRD2, LR, and BR. For more than 100 amino acids located within 12 Å from retinal, the identities are 48.7% between PhaeoRD2 and LR, 46.0% between PhaeoRD2 and BR, and 47.8% between LR and BR. These results suggest that protein core structures are equally different among the three rhodopsins. Thus, the identical FTIR spectra between PhaeoRD2 and LR (but not BR), even for the K state, indicate that fungal rhodopsins possess some common structural motif and dynamics not obvious from the amino acid sequences.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207