Conformational flexibility of tubulin dimers regulates the transitions of microtubule dynamic instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microtubules are highly conserved polymers of αβ-tubulin dimers that undergo dynamic instability. While dynamic instability is conserved across eukaryotes, many of its associated conformational changes, like lattice compaction and twist, are not. Tubulin dimers sample multiple conformations in solution and undergo conformational changes during polymerization; the rate and extent of these changes describes their “conformational flexibility.” Here, we investigate the relationship between the conformational flexibility of tubulins and the dynamic phenotypes of the microtubules they produce with a comparative study of Drosophila melanogaster tubulin (Dm-Tb) and Bos taurus brain tubulin (Bt-Tb). While these tubulins share high sequence and structural similarity, their microtubules display divergent dynamic phenotypes in vitro , with altered transition frequencies between phases of growth and shrinkage. Dm-Tb microtubules showed drastically longer lifetimes, lower barriers to nucleation, and a high rescue frequency, while maintaining a similar growth rate to Bt-Tb microtubules. 3D reconstruction of mature Dm-Tb microtubules showed high structural conservation with mammalian microtubules. However, when we performed molecular dynamics simulations of free tubulin dimers, we found Dm-Tb to be more rigid and adopt fewer conformational states than Bt-Tb. Biochemical characterizations experimentally confirmed this finding, leading us to hypothesize that differences in the conformational flexibility of tubulins may tune the frequency of transitions between the dynamic phases of microtubules, thereby altering their stability and overall dynamic phenotypes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".