De novo protein identification in mammalian sperm using in situ cryoelectron tomography and AlphaFold2 docking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To understand the molecular mechanisms of cellular pathways, contemporary workflows typically require multiple techniques to identify proteins, track their localization, and determine their structures in vitro. Here, we combined cellular cryoelectron tomography (cryo-ET) and AlphaFold2 modeling to address these questions and understand how mammalian sperm are built in situ. Our cellular cryo-ET and subtomogram averaging provided 6.0-Å reconstructions of axonemal microtubule structures. The well-resolved tertiary structures allowed us to unbiasedly match sperm-specific densities with 21,615 AlphaFold2-predicted protein models of the mouse proteome. We identified Tektin 5, CCDC105, and SPACA9 as novel microtubule-associated proteins. These proteins form an extensive interaction network crosslinking the lumen of axonemal doublet microtubules, suggesting their roles in modulating the mechanical properties of the filaments. Indeed, Tekt5 -/- sperm possess more deformed flagella with 180° bends. Together, our studies presented a cellular visual proteomics workflow and shed light on the in vivo functions of Tektin 5.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".