MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040217928 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232137

Characterizing the actin-binding ability of Zasp52 and its contribution to myofibril assembly

2020· article· en· W3040217928 on OpenAlexafffund
Kuo An Liao, Nicanor González‐Morales, Frieder Schöck

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMyofibrilPDZ domainSarcomereActinCell biologyActininMyosinActin-binding proteinBiophysicsDrosophila melanogasterBiologyChemistryActin cytoskeletonBiochemistryCytoskeletonMyocyte

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In sarcomeres, α-actinin crosslinks thin filaments and anchors them at the Z-disc. Drosophila melanogaster Zasp52 also localizes at Z-discs and interacts with α-actinin via its extended PDZ domain, thereby contributing to myofibril assembly and maintenance, yet the detailed mechanism of Zasp52 function is unknown. Here we show a strong genetic interaction between actin and Zasp52 during indirect flight muscle assembly, indicating that this interaction plays a critical role during myofibril assembly. Our results suggest that Zasp52 contains an actin-binding site, which includes the extended PDZ domain and the ZM region. Zasp52 binds with micromolar affinity to monomeric actin. A co-sedimentation assay indicates that Zasp52 can also bind to F-actin. Finally, we use in vivo rescue assays of myofibril assembly to show that the α-actinin-binding domain of Zasp52 is not sufficient for a full rescue of Zasp52 mutants suggesting additional contributions of Zasp52 actin-binding to myofibril assembly.

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 score0.005

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207