Carrot ‘antifreeze’ protein has an irregular ice-binding site that confers weak freezing point depression but strong inhibition of ice recrystallization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ice-binding proteins (IBPs) are found in many biological kingdoms where they protect organisms from freezing damage as antifreeze agents or inhibitors of ice recrystallization. Here, the crystal structure of recombinant IBP from carrot (Daucus carota) has been solved to a resolution of 2.3 Å. As predicted, the protein is a structural homologue of a plant polygalacturonase-inhibiting protein forming a curved solenoid structure with a leucine-rich repeat motif. Unexpectedly, close examination of its surface did not reveal any large regions of flat, regularly spaced hydrophobic residues that characterize the ice-binding sites (IBSs) of potent antifreeze proteins from freeze-resistant fish and insects. An IBS was defined by site-directed mutagenesis of residues on the convex surface of the carrot solenoid. This imperfect site is reminiscent of the irregular IBS of grass 'antifreeze' protein. Like the grass protein, the carrot IBP has weak freezing point depression activity but is extremely active at nanomolar concentrations in inhibiting ice recrystallization. Ice crystals formed in the presence of both plant proteins grow slowly and evenly in all directions. We suggest that this slow, controlled ice growth is desirable for freeze tolerance. The fact that two plant IBPs have evolved very different protein structures to affect ice in a similar manner suggests this pattern of weak freezing point depression and strong ice recrystallization inhibition helps their host to tolerate freezing rather than to resist it.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".