Faculty Opinions recommendation of Targeting of the tail-anchored peroxisomal membrane proteins PEX26 and PEX15 occurs through C-terminal PEX19-binding sites.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tail-anchored proteins contain a single transmembrane domain (TMD) followed by a short C-terminal domain extending into the organellar lumen. Tail-anchored proteins are thought to target to the correct subcellular compartment by virtue of general physicochemical properties of their C-termini; however, the machineries that enable correct sorting remain largely elusive. Here we analyzed targeting of the human peroxisomal tail-anchored protein PEX26. Its C-terminal-targeting signal contains two binding sites for PEX19, the import receptor for several peroxisomal membrane proteins. One PEX19-binding site overlapped with the TMD, the other was contained within the luminal domain. Although the PEX19-binding site containing the TMD targeted to peroxisomes to some extent, the luminal site proved essential for correct targeting of the full-length protein, as it prevented PEX26 from mislocalization to mitochondria. Its function as a targeting motif was proved by its ability to insert a heterologous TMD-containing fragment into the peroxisomal membrane. Finally we show that PEX19 is essential for PEX26 import. Analysis of the yeast tail-anchored protein Pex15p revealed that it also harbors a luminal PEX19-binding site that acts as a peroxisomal-targeting motif. We conclude that C-terminal PEX19-binding sites mark tail-anchored proteins for delivery to peroxisomes. PMID: 16763195
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.605 | 0.475 |
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".