MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415431770 · doi:10.1002/pro.70359

Collaboration between two conserved sequence motifs drives <scp>ATPase</scp> stimulation of Hsp90 by Aha1

2025· article· en· W4415431770 on OpenAlexafffund
Desmond Prah Amoah, Rebecca Mercier, Gnin Alyousef, Jill L. Johnson, Paul LaPointe

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsHsp90Chaperone (clinical)ATPaseConserved sequenceSequence motifYeastSaccharomyces cerevisiaeResidue (chemistry)Plasma protein binding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hsp90 is a dimeric molecular chaperone essential for the folding, stabilization, activation, and maturation of hundreds of client proteins, which are critical for cellular function. Co-chaperones, such as Aha1, play a key role in regulating the ATP-dependent Hsp90 client activation cycle by modulating Hsp90's ATPase activity and controlling progression through the cycle. Two highly conserved motifs in Aha1-the NxNNWHW and RKxK motifs-are known to regulate specific aspects of the Hsp90 ATPase cycle. In this study, we demonstrate that the K60 residue within the RKxK motif facilitates the structural organization of the NxNNWHW motif prior to ATP hydrolysis. Mutation of the K60 residue partially impairs the in vivo functionality of yeast Aha1. Additionally, we reveal that each individual residue within the NxNNWHW motif modulates the ATPase rate and apparent affinity for ATP of Hsp90. These findings provide new insights into how conserved regions of Aha-type co-chaperones influence Hsp90 kinetics and its regulation of client protein folding.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtein ScienceSame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207