Thermodynamic and kinetic stability of the Josephin Domain closed arrangement: evidences from replica exchange molecular dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular phenomena driving pathological aggregation in neurodegenerative diseases are not completely understood yet. Peculiar is the case of Spinocerebellar Ataxia 3 (SCA3) where the conformational properties of the AT-3 N-terminal region, also called Josephin Domain (JD), play a key role in the first step of aggregation, having the JD an amyloidogenic propensity itself. For this reason, unraveling the intimate relationship between JD structural features and aggregation tendency may lead to a step forward in understanding the pathology and rationally design a cure. In this connection, computational modeling has demonstrated to be helpful in exploring the protein molecular dynamics and mechanism of action. RESULTS: Conformational dynamics of the JD is here finely investigated by replica exchange molecular dynamics simulations able to sample the microsecond time scale and to provide both a thermodynamic and kinetic description of the protein conformational changes. Accessible structural conformations of the JD have been identified in: open, intermediate and closed like arrangement. Data indicated the closed JD arrangement as the most likely protein arrangement. The protein transition from closed toward intermediate/open states was characterized by a rate constant higher than 700 ns. This result also explains the inability of classical molecular dynamics to explore transitions from closed to open JD configuration on a time scale of hundreds of nanoseconds. CONCLUSION: This work provides the first kinetic estimation of the JD transition pathway from open-like to closed-like arrangement and vice-versa, indicating the closed-like arrangement as the most likely configuration for a JD in water environment. More widely, the importance of our results is also underscored considering that the ability to provide a kinetic description of the protein conformational changes is a scientific challenge for both experimental and theoretical approaches to date. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by Oliviero Carugo, Bojan Zagrovic.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".