Using a novel structure/function approach to select diverse swine major histocompatibility complex 1 alleles to predict epitopes for vaccine development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Swine leukocyte antigens (SLAs) (i.e. swine major histocompatibility complex proteins) conduct a fundamental role in swine immunity. To generate a protective vaccine across an outbred species, such as pigs, it is critical that epitopes that bind to diverse SLA alleles are used in the vaccine development process. We introduced a new strategy for epitope prediction. RESULTS: We employed molecular dynamics simulation to identify key amino acids for interactions with epitopes. We developed an algorithm wherein each SLA-1 is compared to a crystalized reference allele with unique weighting for non-conserved amino acids based on R group and position. We then performed homology modeling and electrostatic contact mapping to visualize how relatively small changes in sequences impacted the charge distribution in the binding site. We selected eight diverse SLA-1 alleles and performed homology modeling followed, by protein-peptide docking and binding affinity analyses, to identify porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus matrix protein epitopes that bind with high affinity to these alleles. We also performed docking analysis on the epitopes identified as strong binders using NetMHCpan 4.1. Epitopes predicted to bind to our eight SLA-1 alleles had equivalent or higher energetic interactions than those predicted to bind to the NetMHCpan 4.1 allele repertoire. This approach of selecting diverse SLA-1 alleles, followed by homology modeling, and docking simulations, can be used as a novel strategy for epitope prediction that complements other available tools and is especially useful when available tools do not offer a prediction for SLAs/major histocompatibility complex. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The data underlying this article are available in the online Supplementary Material.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".