The Thermal Stability of Recoverin Depends on Calcium Binding and Its Myristoyl Moiety As Revealed by Infrared Spectroscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the structural stability of recoverin, a member of the neuronal calcium sensor family, the effect of temperature, myristoylation, and calcium:protein molar ratio on its secondary structure has been studied by transmission infrared spectroscopy. On the basis of the data, the protein predominantly adopts α-helical structures (∼50-55%) with turns, unordered structures, and β-sheets at 25 °C. The data show no significant impact of the presence of calcium and myristoylation on secondary structure. It is found that, in the absence of calcium, recoverin denatures and self-aggregates while being heated, with the formation of intermolecular antiparallel β-sheets. The nonmyristoylated protein (Rec-nMyr) exhibits a lower temperature threshold of aggregation and a higher intermolecular β-sheet content at 65 °C than the myristoylated protein (Rec-Myr). The former thus appears to be less thermally stable than the latter. In the presence of excess calcium ions (calcium:protein ratio of 10), the protein is thermally stable up to 65 °C with no significant conformational change, the presence of the myristoyl chain having no effect on the thermal stability of recoverin under these conditions. A decrease in the thermal stability of recoverin is observed as the calcium:protein molar ratio decreases, with Rec-nMyr being less stable than Rec-Myr. The data overall suggest that a minimal number of coordinated calcium ions is necessary to fully stabilize the structure of recoverin and that, when bound to the membrane, i.e., when the myristoyl chain protrudes from the interior pocket, recoverin should be more stable than in a Ca-free solution, i.e., when the myristoyl chain is sequestered in the interior.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".