MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Preliminary structural characterization of a methyltransferase involved in rhodoquinone biosynthesis

2020· article· en· W3017216244 on OpenAlexaff
Kathleen L. Vergunst, Kathleen Bergin, Andrew J. Roger, Jennifer N. Shepherd, David N. Langelaan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectron acceptorElectron transport chainChemistryElectrochemical gradientATP synthaseChemiosmosisFunction (biology)Adenosine triphosphateBiochemistrySubstrate (aquarium)MitochondrionBiophysicsEnzymeBiologyMembraneCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary process of energy production for most eukaryotes involves oxidative respiration via the electron transport chain (ETC). In the ETC, electrons are moved by the electron carrier ubiquinone through membrane‐bound protein complexes that pump protons across the mitochondrial membrane, which creates a proton chemical gradient. This gradient is used to produce adenosine triphosphate, which is the primary source of energy in the cell. Oxygen is the final electron acceptor of the ETC for aerobic organisms, but for organisms that live in low‐oxygen environments, other strategies are required for the ETC to function. One strategy used by many species of bacteria and protists is to produce rhodoquinone, which is a derivative of ubiquinone. Rhodoquinone allows the ETC to function in the absence of oxygen by allowing it to use fumarate as the final electron acceptor. RQ is synthesized by the enzyme RquA, which likely uses ubiquinone as a substrate. Our goal is to structurally characterize RquA to better understand its mechanism of catalysis. We used E. coli to overexpress RquA derived from Pygsuia biforma and Rhodospirillum rubrum with a variety of fusion tags and found that RquA expresses to a high level but is located in inclusion bodies. We have developed refolding procedures to isolate RquA and are now characterizing its structure as well as the substrates required for RQ production. Support or Funding Information This research is funded by the New Frontiers in Research Fund ‐ Exploration Stream

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→