MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948531058 · doi:10.1074/jbc.ra119.008511

Molecular mechanism of Aspergillus fumigatus biofilm disruption by fungal and bacterial glycoside hydrolases

2019· article· en· W2948531058 on OpenAlexafffund
François Le Mauff, Natalie C. Bamford, Noor Alnabelseya, Yongzhen Zhang, Perrin Baker, Howard Robinson, Jeroen D. C. Codée, P. Lynne Howell, Donald C. Sheppard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnzyme Production and Characterization
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoMcGill UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenInstitute of Infection and ImmunityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of AlbertaNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesMcGill University
KeywordsAspergillus fumigatusHydrolaseBiofilmGlycoside hydrolaseMicrobiologyBiochemistryVirulenceEnzymeChemistryPseudomonas aeruginosaProtein structureBiologyBacteriaGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During infection, the fungal pathogen Aspergillus fumigatus forms biofilms that enhance its resistance to antimicrobials and host defenses. An integral component of the biofilm matrix is galactosaminogalactan (GAG), a cationic polymer of α-1,4-linked galactose and partially deacetylated N -acetylgalactosamine (GalNAc). Recent studies have shown that recombinant hydrolase domains from Sph3, an A. fumigatus glycoside hydrolase involved in GAG synthesis, and PelA, a multifunctional protein from Pseudomonas aeruginosa involved in Pel polysaccharide biosynthesis, can degrade GAG, disrupt A. fumigatus biofilms, and attenuate fungal virulence in a mouse model of invasive aspergillosis. The molecular mechanisms by which these enzymes disrupt biofilms have not been defined. We hypothesized that the hydrolase domains of Sph3 and PelA (Sph3 h and PelA h , respectively) share structural and functional similarities given their ability to degrade GAG and disrupt A. fumigatus biofilms. MALDI-TOF enzymatic fingerprinting and NMR experiments revealed that both proteins are retaining endo-α-1,4- N- acetylgalactosaminidases with a minimal substrate size of seven residues. The crystal structure of PelA h was solved to 1.54 Å and structure alignment to Sph3 h revealed that the enzymes share similar catalytic site residues. However, differences in the substrate-binding clefts result in distinct enzyme-substrate interactions. PelA h hydrolyzed partially deacetylated substrates better than Sph3 h , a finding that agrees well with PelA h 's highly electronegative binding cleft versus the neutral surface present in Sph3 h . Our insight into PelA h 's structure and function necessitate the creation of a new glycoside hydrolase family, GH166, whose structural and mechanistic features, along with those of GH135 (Sph3), are reported here.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations68
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicEnzyme Production and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207