MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416347101 · doi:10.1111/febs.70323

Winter‐active spiders ( <i>Clubiona</i> ) have a hyperactive antifreeze protein with a unique beta‐solenoid fold

2025· article· en· W4416347101 on OpenAlexafffund
Laurie A. Graham, Stano Pekár, Ina M. Hainer, Peter L. Davies

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPhysiological and biochemical adaptations
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAntifreeze proteinSpiderGenBankInsectProtein sequencingProteomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spiders are among the most important natural enemies of pests in orchards. Clubiona spp. are active even during winter, when other pest predators are dormant. Such activity is possible because these spiders produce antifreeze proteins (AFPs) that bind to the surface of ice crystals to prevent their growth at subzero temperatures. To investigate their AFPs, we collected Clubiona spiders from a pome fruit orchard in the Czech Republic on subzero days in December and February. The AFPs were isolated through five successive rounds of ice-affinity purification as a family of ~30-kDa isoforms. Tryptic fragments from these AFPs were sequenced using tandem mass spectrometry and corresponding transcripts were obtained from an Illumina metatranscriptome. Homologs were absent from the GenBank protein database. Protein modelling with AlphaFold2 shows that these spider AFPs form a previously unseen β-solenoid with a flat surface populated by arrays of threonine (Thr) residues. Although these features are like those of the β-solenoid AFPs from beetles and moths, the proteins are not homologous. This is a remarkable example of convergent evolution of proteins at both the structural and sequence levels for the task of binding ice.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.199
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS JournalSame topicPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsFrench-language works237,207