Electron diffraction captures high-resolution structures from <i>in vivo</i> protein nanocrystals of <i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bacillus thuringiensis is one of the most widely used biopesticides worldwide owing to the highly specific pesticidal-proteins various strains produce in the form of nanocrystals. Structure determination of such crystals remains difficult because their small size makes them unsuitable for conventional X-ray crystallography. Here we explore two emerging (cryo-) electron diffraction techniques, namely three-dimensional electron diffraction and serial electron diffraction, as tools for studying the structures of these crystals. Using the mosquitocidal protein Cry11Aa as an example, we compare electron diffraction with state of the art results obtained with an X-ray free electron laser. Our work demonstrates that electron diffraction is a viable alternative for structure determination from such challenging crystals, in some cases outperforming previous results obtained with X-ray free electron lasers. We present a workflow based on readily available instrumentation enabling structure determination directly from the crystals grown in vivo , unperturbed by dissolution and therefore preserved in their native state.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".