MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316641879 · doi:10.1021/bi400951q

Unraveling the Substrate Recognition Mechanism and Specificity of the Unusual Glycosyl Hydrolase Family 29 BT2192 from <i>Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron</i>

2014· article· en· W2316641879 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laure Guillotin, Pierre Lafite, Richard Daniellou

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsBacteroides thetaiotaomicronHydrolaseGlycosylGalactosideChemistryGlycoside hydrolaseStereochemistryMoietyActive siteEnzymeBinding siteFucoseBiochemistrySubstrate (aquarium)BacteroidesBiologyGalactoseGeneticsBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glycosyl hydrolase (GH) family 29 (CAZy database) consists of retaining α-l-fucosidases. We have identified BT2192, a protein from Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, as the first GH29 representative exhibiting both weak α-l-fucosidase and β-d-galactosidase activities. Determination and analysis of X-ray structures of BT2192 in complex with β-d-galactoside competitive inhibitors showed a new binding mode different from that of known GH29 enzymes. Three point mutations, specific to BT2192, prevent the canonical GH29 substrate α-l-fucose from binding efficiently to the fucosidase-like active site relative to other GH29 enzymes. β-d-Galactoside analogues bind and interact in a second pocket, which is not visible in other reported GH29 structures. Molecular simulations helped in the assessment of the flexibility of both substrates in their respective pocket. Hydrolysis of the fucosyl moiety from the putative natural substrates like 3-fucosyllactose or Lewis(X) antigen would be mainly due to the efficient interactions with the galactosyl moiety, in the second binding site, located more than 6-7 Å apart.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistrySame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207