Identification and mapping of central pair proteins by proteomic analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cilia or flagella of eukaryotes are small micro-hair like structures that are indispensable to single-cell motility and play an important role in mammalian biological processes. Cilia or flagella are composed of nine doublet microtubules surrounding a pair of singlet microtubules called the central pair (CP). Together, this arrangement forms a canonical and highly conserved 9+2 axonemal structure. The CP, which is a unique structure exclusive to motile cilia, is a pair of structurally dimorphic singlet microtubules decorated with numerous associated proteins. Mutations of CP-associated proteins cause several different physical symptoms termed as ciliopathies. Thus, it is crucial to understand the architecture of the CP. However, the protein composition of the CP was poorly understood. This was because the traditional method of identification of CP proteins was mostly limited by available Chlamydomonas mutants of CP proteins. Recently, more CP protein candidates were presented based on mass spectrometry results, but most of these proteins were not validated. In this study, we re-evaluated the CP proteins by conducting a similar comprehensive CP proteome analysis comparing the mass spectrometry results of the axoneme sample prepared from Chlamydomonas strains with and without CP complex. We identified a similar set of CP protein candidates and additional new 11 CP protein candidates. Furthermore, by using Chlamydomonas strains lacking specific CP sub-structures, we present a more complete model of localization for these CP proteins. This work has established a new foundation for understanding the function of the CP complex in future studies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".