MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392200395 · doi:10.3390/molecules29051033

Protein–Ligand Binding and Structural Modelling Studies of Pheromone-Binding Protein-like Sol g 2.1 from Solenopsis geminata Fire Ant Venom

2024· article· en· W4392200395 on OpenAlexafffund
Siriporn Nonkhwao, Erika Plettner, Sakda Daduang

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecules · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersRoyal Golden Jubilee (RGJ) Ph.D. ProgrammeSimon Fraser UniversityNational Research Council of ThailandKhon Kaen University
KeywordsFire antVenomLigand (biochemistry)ANTBinding proteinChemistryBiologyZoologyEcologyBiochemistryHymenopteraReceptorGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sol g 2 is the major protein in Solenopsis geminata fire ant venom. It shares the highest sequence identity with Sol i 2 (S. invicta) and shares high structural homology with LmaPBP (pheromone-binding protein (PBP) from the cockroach Leucophaea maderae). We examined the specific Sol g 2 protein ligands from fire ant venom. The results revealed that the protein naturally formed complexes with hydrocarbons, including decane, undecane, dodecane, and tridecane, in aqueous venom solutions. Decane showed the highest affinity binding (Kd) with the recombinant Sol g 2.1 protein (rSol g 2.1). Surprisingly, the mixture of alkanes exhibited a higher binding affinity with the rSol g 2.1 protein compared to a single one, which is related to molecular docking simulations, revealing allosteric binding sites in the Sol g 2.1 protein model. In the trail-following bioassay, we observed that a mixture of the protein sol g 2.1 and hydrocarbons elicited S. geminata worker ants to follow trails for a longer time and distance compared to a mixture containing only hydrocarbons. This suggests that Sol g 2.1 protein may delay the evaporation of the hydrocarbons. Interestingly, the piperidine alkaloids extracted have the highest attraction to the ants. Therefore, the mixture of hydrocarbons and piperidines had a synergistic effect on the trail-following of ants when both were added to the protein.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMoleculesSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207