Deamidation of the human eye lens protein γS-crystallin accelerates oxidative aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Cataract disease, a clouding of the eye lens due to precipitation of lens proteins, affects millions of people every year worldwide. The proteins that comprise the lens, the crystallins, show extensive post-translational modifications (PTMs) in aged and cataractous lenses, most commonly deamidation and oxidation. Although surface-exposed glutamines and asparagines show the highest rates of deamidation, multiple modifications can accumulate over time in these long-lived proteins, even for buried residues. Both deamidation and oxidation have been shown to promote crystallin aggregation in vitro ; however, it is not clear precisely how these modified crystallins contribute to insolubilization. Here, we report six novel crystal structures of a major human lens protein, γS-crystallin (γS): one of the wild-type in a monomeric state, and five of deamidated γS variants, ranging from three to nine deamidation sites, after varying degrees of sample aging. Consistent with previous work that focused on single-to triple-site deamidation, the deamidation mutations do not appear to drastically change the fold of γS; however, increasing deamidation leads to accelerated oxidation and disulfide bond formation. Successive addition of deamidated sites progressively destabilized protein structure as evaluated by differential scanning fluorimetry. Light scattering showed the deamidated variants display an increased propensity for aggregation compared to the wild-type protein. The results suggest the deamidated variants are useful as models for accelerated aging; the structural changes observed over time provide support for redox activity of γS-crystallin in the human lens. Highlights Novel structures of cataract-associated variants of human eye lens protein γS-crystallin reported Increasing deamidation of γS-crystallin decreases stability and affects aggregation propensity Overall fold of γS-crystallin maintained among deamidated and disulfide-bonded variants Deamidated γS variants form disulfide bonds more rapidly than wild-type γS Potential functional advantage of disulfide bonding in the CXCXC motif proposed
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".