Structural and physical basis for the elasticity of elastin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elastin function is to endow vertebrate tissues with elasticity so that they can adapt to local mechanical constraints. The hydrophobicity and insolubility of the mature elastin polymer have hampered studies of its molecular organisation and structure-elasticity relationships. Nevertheless, a growing number of studies from a broad range of disciplines have provided invaluable insights, and several structural models of elastin have been proposed. However, many questions remain regarding how the primary sequence of elastin (and the soluble precursor tropoelastin) governs the molecular structure, its organisation into a polymeric network, and the mechanical properties of the resulting material. The elasticity of elastin is known to be largely entropic in origin, a property that is understood to arise from both its disordered molecular structure and its hydrophobic character. Despite a high degree of hydrophobicity, elastin does not form compact, water-excluding domains and remains highly disordered. However, elastin contains both stable and labile secondary structure elements. Current models of elastin structure and function are drawn from data collected on tropoelastin and on elastin-like peptides (ELPs) but at the tissue level, elasticity is only achieved after polymerisation of the mature elastin. In tissues, the reticulation of tropoelastin chains in water defines the polymer elastin that bears elasticity. Similarly, ELPs require polymerisation to become elastic. There is considerable interest in elastin especially in the biomaterials and cosmetic fields where ELPs are widely used. This review aims to provide an up-to-date survey of/perspective on current knowledge about the interplay between elastin structure, solvation, and entropic elasticity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".