MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768949746 · doi:10.1139/bcb-2017-0263

Identification of nuclear localization signals in the human homeoprotein MSX1

2017· article· en· W2768949746 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akio Shibata, Junichiro Machida, Seishi Yamaguchi, Masashi Kimura, Tadashi Tatematsu, Hitoshi Miyachi, Atsuo Nakayama, Kazuo Shimozato, Yoshihito Tokita

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear localization sequenceNLSHomeoboxNuclear proteinGreen fluorescent proteinNuclear transportTranscription factorChimera (genetics)Nuclear export signalBiologyFusion proteinCell biologyComputational biologyGeneticsGeneCell nucleusRecombinant DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MSX1 is one of the homeoproteins with the homeodomain (HD) sequence, which regulates proliferation and differentiation of mesenchymal cells. In this study, we investigated the nuclear localization signal (NLS) in the MSX1 HD by deletion and amino acid substitution analyses. The web-based tool NLStradamus predicted 2 putative basic motifs in the N- and C-termini of the MSX1 HD. Green fluorescent protein (GFP) chimera studies revealed that NLS1 ( 161 RKHKTNRKPR 170 ) and NLS2 ( 216 NRRAKAKR 223 ) were independently insufficient for robust nuclear localization. However, they can work cooperatively to promote nuclear localization of MSX1, as was shown by the 2 tandem NLS motifs partially restoring functional NLS, leading to a significant nuclear accumulation of the GFP chimera. These results demonstrate a unique NLS motif in MSX1, which consists of an essential single core motif in helix-I, with weak potency, and an auxiliary subdomain in helix-III, which alone does not have nuclear localization potency. Additionally, other peptide sequences, other than predicted 2 motifs in the spacer, may be necessary for complete nuclear localization in MSX1 HD.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207