MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assembly Principles of the Human R2TP Chaperone Complex Reveal the Presence of R2T and R2P Complexes

2022· article· en· W4225386846 on OpenAlexafffund
Walid A. Houry, Thiago Vargas Seraphim

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChaperone (clinical)ChemistryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

R2TP is a highly conserved chaperone complex formed by two AAA+ ATPases, RUVBL1 and RUVBL2, that associate with PIH1D1 and RPAP3 proteins. R2TP acts in promoting macromolecular complex formation. Here, we establish the principles of R2TP assembly. Three distinct RUVBL1/2‐based complexes are identified: R2TP, RUVBL1/2‐RPAP3 (R2T), and RUVBL1/2‐PIH1D1 (R2P). Interestingly, we find that PIH1D1 does not bind to RUVBL1/RUVBL2 in R2TP and does not function as a nucleotide exchange factor; instead, RPAP3 is found to be the central subunit coordinating R2TP architecture and linking PIH1D1 and RUVBL1/2. We also report that RPAP3 contains an intrinsically disordered N‐terminal domain mediating interactions with substrates whose sequences are primarily enriched for armadillo repeat domains and other helical‐type domains. Our work provides a clear and consistent model of R2TP complex structure and gives important insights into how a chaperone machine concerned with assembly of folded proteins into multisubunit complexes might work.

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 score0.002

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207