Functional anatomy of the full-length CXCR4-CXCL12 complex systematically dissected by quantitative model-guided mutagenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because of their prominent roles in development, cancer, and HIV, the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12 have been the subject of numerous structural and functional studies, but the determinants of ligand binding, selectivity, and signaling are still poorly understood. Here, building on our latest structural model, we used a systematic mutagenesis strategy to dissect the functional anatomy of the CXCR4-CXCL12 complex. Key charge swap mutagenesis experiments provided evidence for pairwise interactions between oppositely charged residues in the receptor and chemokine, confirming the accuracy of the predicted orientation of the chemokine relative to the receptor and providing insight into ligand selectivity. Progressive deletion of N-terminal residues revealed an unexpected contribution of the receptor N terminus to chemokine signaling. This finding challenges a longstanding "two-site" hypothesis about the essential features of the receptor-chemokine interaction in which the N terminus contributes only to binding affinity. Our results suggest that although the interaction of the chemokine N terminus with the receptor-binding pocket is the key driver of signaling, the signaling amplitude depends on the extent to which the receptor N terminus binds the chemokine. Together with systematic characterization of other epitopes, these data enable us to propose an experimentally consistent structural model for how CXCL12 binds CXCR4 and initiates signal transmission through the receptor transmembrane domain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".