MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809197658 · doi:10.1186/s13104-018-3513-4

Investigating the functionality of a ribosome-binding mutant of NAA15 using Saccharomyces cerevisiae

2018· article· en· W2809197658 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvia Varland, Thomas Arnesen

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Research Notes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeptidase Inhibition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersHelse VestNorges ForskningsrådEuropean CommissionBergens ForskningsstiftelseKreftforeningenUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeMutantComputational biologyRibosomeBioinformaticsGeneticsBiologyYeastComputer scienceCell biologyGeneRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: N-terminal acetylation is a common protein modification that occurs preferentially co-translationally as the substrate N-terminus is emerging from the ribosome. The major N-terminal acetyltransferase complex A (NatA) is estimated to N-terminally acetylate more than 40% of the human proteome. To form a functional NatA complex the catalytic subunit NAA10 must bind the auxiliary subunit NAA15, which properly folds NAA10 for correct substrate acetylation as well as anchors the entire complex to the ribosome. Mutations in these two genes are associated with various neurodevelopmental disorders in humans. The aim of this study was to investigate the in vivo functionality of a Schizosaccharomyces pombe NAA15 mutant that is known to prevent NatA from associating with ribosomes, but retains NatA-specific activity in vitro. RESULTS: Here, we show that Schizosaccharomyces pombe NatA can functionally replace Saccharomyces cerevisiae NatA. We further demonstrate that the NatA ribosome-binding mutant Naa15 ΔN K6E is unable to rescue the temperature-sensitive growth phenotype of budding yeast lacking NatA. This finding indicates the in vivo importance of the co-translational nature of NatA-mediated N-terminal acetylation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.344
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.117 · 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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Research NotesSame topicPeptidase Inhibition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207