ERAP1-ERAP2 dimers trim MHC I-bound precursor peptides; implications for understanding peptide editing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The processing of MHC class I antigenic precursor peptides by the endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 1 (ERAP1) and ERAP2 is an important event in the cell biology of antigen presentation. To date, the molecular context by which the ERAP enzymes trim precursor peptides, and how ERAPs shape peptide repertoires, remain open questions. Using ERAP1 and ERAP2 heterodimers (ERAP1/2), and N-terminally extended model and natural peptides in their free and HLA-B*0801-bound forms, we characterized the mode of action of ERAPs. We provide evidence that ERAP1/2 can trim MHC I-bound precursor peptides to their correct and final lengths, albeit more slowly than the corresponding free precursors. Trimming of MHC I-bound precursors by ERAP1/2 increases the conformational stability of MHC I/peptide complexes. From the data, we propose a molecular mechanistic model of ERAP1/2 as peptide editors. Overall, our study provides new findings on a significant issue of the ERAP-mediated processing pathway of MHC class I antigens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".