MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020013968 · doi:10.1002/cbic.202000142

Role of Two Exceptional <i>trans</i> Adenylation Domains and MbtH‐like Proteins in the Biosynthesis of the Nonribosomal Peptide WS9324A from <i>Streptomyces calvus</i> ATCC 13382

2020· article· en· W3020013968 on OpenAlexaff
Mirjam Bernhardt, Stefanie Berman, David L. Zechel, Andreas Bechthold

Bibliographic record

VenueChemBioChem · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMicrobial Natural Products and Biosynthesis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsAdenylylationNonribosomal peptideBiosynthesisBiologyAmino acidGene clusterPeptideBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nonribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPS) are organized in a modular arrangement. Usually, the modular order corresponds to the assembly of the amino acids in the respective peptide, following the collinearity rule. The WS9326A biosynthetic gene cluster from Streptomyces calvus shows deviations from this rule. Most interesting is the presence of two trans adenylation domains that are located downstream of the modular NRPS arrangement. Adenylation domains are responsible for the activation of their respective amino acids. In this study, we confirmed the involvement of the trans adenylation domains in WS9326A biosynthesis by performing gene knockout experiments and by observing the selective adenylation of their predicted amino acid substrates in vitro. We conclude that the trans adenylation domains are essential for WS9326A biosynthesis. Moreover, both adenylation domains are observed to have MbtH-like protein dependency. Overall, we conclude that the trans adenylation domains are essential for WS9326A biosynthesis.

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemBioChemSame topicMicrobial Natural Products and BiosynthesisFrench-language works237,207