MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of the Structure Between the Wild Type Lamin A/C Protein and the Cardiac Disease Causing Variant D192G

2017· article· en· W2969817829 on OpenAlexaff
Susan M. Wall, Alexandra Akman, Alyssa Chow, Mirella Deng, Flavia Dumitrascu, Max Jiang, Maggie McCartney, Tanya T. Nguyen, Théo A. Rulko, Nicholas Sullivan, Lauren Wang, Mason Xiao, Hannah A. Nicolas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNuclear Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaminLMNANuclear laminaMutationBiologyWild typeMutantNuclear proteinCell biologyGeneticsGeneMolecular biologyTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lamin A/C (LMNA) gene codes for A type lamins which are key components of the nuclear lamina and are involved in maintaining the structure of the nucleus and its processes. Mutations in LMNA cause a group of diseases known as laminopathies. For this project, the lamin A/C variant affecting amino acid 192 is studied. The causal mutation results in an amino acid change from glycine [G] (smaller, non‐polar, uncharged) to aspartic acid [D] (larger, polar, charged). This D192G variant is linked to a severe form of a cardiac disease called Dilated Cardiomyopathy (DCM), where cardiomyocytes are presented with multiple nuclear abnormalities. In vitro experiments with the D192G variant showed abnormal nuclear localization of Protein Kinase C alpha (PKC‐α). PKC‐α is the major protein kinase C isoform found in the heart and skeletal muscles. This enzyme phosphorylates a host of proteins and uses A‐type lamins to reach its nuclear targets. In order to help elucidate the potential role of PKC‐α as the link between the disease phenotype and lamin mutation, a structural comparison between the wild type lamin A and the D192G variant was performed in silico. Moreover, the PKC‐α binding site on the wild type and mutant lamin A were compared in order to determine if a conformation change has occurred. Since there is currently no full‐length crystal structure for either the wild type or D192G lamin A/C variant, the I‐TASSER software suite was used to generate simulated protein structures. The top five structures for the WT and variant simulations were examined. The final models selected to most likely represent reality were chosen based on various factors such as computed C‐score, what is known in literature and human analysis of the simulations. The results show that the D192G variant predominantly takes a globular form which is very comparable to the structure of the wild type lamin A found in the nucleoplasm. This globular form also potentially explains the lamin aggregates found in cells expressing the D192G variant. However, this globular variant conformation significantly differs when compared to the known and prevalent wild type lamin A conformation which is the globular head‐alpha helical rod‐globular tail structure. In particular, the conformation of PKCα binding site on lamin A is also significantly altered. The Ashbury College MSOE Center for BioMolecular Modeling SMART Team used 3‐D modeling and printing technology to examine the structure‐function relationships of the wild type lamin A/C protein and the D192G variant.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicNuclear Structure and FunctionFrench-language works237,207