Mapping Charge Interactions in Intrinsically Disordered Proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are often rich in charged residues, and electrostatic interactions have a pronounced effect on their conformational distributions, interactions and functions. However, attaining quantitative understanding of electrostatics is challenging because of the sequence-specific arrangement of charges in the chain, the long-range nature of electrostatic interactions, charge screening, and the condensation of counterions-effects that all need to be taken into account self-consistently. Here, analytically tractable quantitative models are developed to predict ensemble average distances between any pair of residues in IDPs as a function of sequence and salt concentration, explicitly considering charge patterning. These models are tested systematically against extensive single-molecule Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) data mapping intrachain distances for a range of charged IDPs with different sequence compositions, as a function of salt concentration, and with different labeling positions and fluorophores. The resulting polymer model with a minimal set of adjustable parameters accounts for counterion condensation, the resulting effective charges, as well as dipolar interactions, and can be used to predict detailed intrachain distance maps between all residues. Analytical models of this kind offer a valuable complement to simulations and can provide fundamental insight into the interactions underlying the conformational distributions of IDPs.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".