MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208295991 · doi:10.1107/s0108767321097130

Structural comparison of <i>Faecalibacterium prausnitzii</i> α-glycosidases and sucrase-isomaltase

2021· article· en· W3208295991 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Jewczynko, David R. Rose

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations and Advances · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDigestive system and related health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFaecalibacterium prausnitziiChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human gastrointestinal system is home to a very diverse microbiome that is made up of approximately 100 trillion microorganisms. This microbiome has a significant impact on human health, as it can influence the immune system, the central nervous system and the body's metabolism. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii is one of the most abundant microorganisms found in a healthy gut, where it makes up about 5% of the microbiome. This gastrointestinal microorganism produces 2 enzymes belonging to the glycoside hydrolase family 31, which will be referred to as Fp-G1 and Fp-G2. These -glycosidases have notable structural similarities to the N-terminal subunit of sucrase-isomaltase. Sucrase-Isomaltase (SI) is a gastrointestinal enzyme found in humans, and is responsible for hydrolyzing carbohydrates with -1,6, -1,4 and -1,2 glycosidic bonds. The objective of this project is to compare the enzymatic activity of F. prausnitzii -glycosidases to the N-terminal subunit of SI, in order to investigate the structural similarities between the proteins. Real time kinetic assays and computational models will be used to identify structural features contributing to the differences in substrate affinity. These investigations into protein structure and enzymatic activity of the -glucosidase proteins will provide a clearer insight on the structure and function of the Fp-G1, Fp-G2, and SI.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.862
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section A Foundations and AdvancesSame topicDigestive system and related healthFrench-language works237,207