MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2383519867

[An insertion mutant of LeuRS with 116 amino acid residues has full activity].

2003· article· en· W2383519867 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Huang, Ling Chen, Tong Li, Geng Lei Tong, En Duo Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutantAmino acidEnzymeEscherichia coliBiochemistryTransfer RNAChemistryPeptide sequenceMolecular biologyBiologyGeneRNA
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Escherichia coli leucyl-tRNA synthetase (LeuRS) belongs to class I aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases. It consists of 860 amino acid residues and catalyzes the leucylation of tRNA(Leu). An insertion of its 253-368 peptide fragment between 368 to 369 in CP1 domain of this enzyme was shown to maintain the activity of the enzyme, and the insertion mutant was named as LeuRS-C. Because the insertion mutant of LeuRS was sensitive to operation of the purification, a plasmid containing the gene encoding LeuRS with His(6)-tag at its N-terminus was constructed to facilitate the purification of His(6)-LeuRS-C through one-step affinity chromatography on Ni(2+)-NTA column. The purified His(6)-LeuRS-C had full activity as the native LeuRS with His-tag at the N-terminus (His(6)-LeuRS), although the mutant enzyme had an insertion of 116 amino acid residues. The kinetic parameters of His(6)-LeuRS-C were determined. The secondary structure estimated by CD spectrum and thermal stability of the insertion mutant was compared with those of His(6)-LeuRS, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→