Wnt binding to Coatomer proteins directs secretion on exosomes independently of palmitoylation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Wnt proteins are secreted hydrophobic glycoproteins that act over long distances through poorly understood mechanisms. We discovered that Wnt7a is secreted on extracellular vesicles (EVs) following muscle injury. Structural analysis identified the motif responsible for Wnt7a secretion on EVs that we term the Exosome Binding Peptide (EBP). Addition of the EBP to an unrelated protein directed secretion on EVs. Disruption of palmitoylation, knockdown of WLS, or deletion of the N-terminal signal peptide did not affect Wnt7a secretion on purified EVs. Bio-ID analysis identified Coatomer proteins as candidates responsible for loading Wnt7a onto EVs. The crystal structure of EBP bound to the COPB2 coatomer subunit, the binding thermodynamics, and mutagenesis experiments, together demonstrate that a dilysine motif in the EBP mediates binding to COPB2. Other Wnts contain functionally analogous structural motifs. Mutation of the EBP results in a significant impairment in the ability of Wnt7a to stimulate regeneration, indicating that secretion of Wnt7a on exosomes is critical for normal regeneration in vivo . Our studies have defined the structural mechanism that mediates binding of Wnt7a to exosomes and elucidated the singularity of long-range Wnt signalling.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".