Display of the HIV envelope protein at the yeast cell surface for immunogen development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a step toward the development of variant forms of Env with enhanced immunogenic properties, we have expressed the glycoprotein in the yeast surface display system in a form that can be subjected to random mutagenesis followed by screening for forms with enhanced binding to germline antibodies. To optimize the expression and immunogenicity of the yeast-displayed Env protein, we tested different approaches for cell wall anchoring, expression of gp120 and gp140 Env from different viral strains, the effects of introducing mutations designed to stabilize Env, and the effects of procedures for altering N-linked glycosylation of Env. We find that diverse forms of HIV envelope glycoprotein can be efficiently expressed at the yeast cell surface and that gp140 forms of Env are effectively cleaved by Kex2p, the yeast furin protease homolog. Multiple yeast-displayed gp120 and gp140 proteins are capable of binding to antibodies directed against the V3-variable loop, CD4 binding site, and gp41 membrane-proximal regions, including some antibodies whose binding is known to depend on Env conformation and N-linked glycan. Based on antibody recognition and sensitivity to glycosidases, yeast glycosylation patterns partially mimic high mannose-type N-glycosylation in mammalian cells. However, yeast-displayed Env is not recognized by some anti-Env antibodies sensitive to quaternary structure, suggesting either that the displayed protein exists in a monomeric state or that for these antibodies, yeast glycosylation in certain regions hinders recognition or access. Consistent with studies in other systems, reconstructed predicted unmutated precursors to anti-Env antibodies exhibit little affinity for the yeast-displayed envelope protein.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".