Expression of actin mutants to study their roles in cardiomyopathyThis paper is one of a selection of papers published this Special Issue, entitled Young Investigator's Forum.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutations in the human cardiac actin gene (ACTC) have been implicated in the development of hypertrophic or dilated cardiomyopathy in humans. To determine the molecular mechanism for the disease development, a system for the expression of mutant cardiac actin proteins that may be lethal to eukaryotic cells must be developed. Here, we explore some of the advantages and disadvantages of human ACTC expression in yeast and insect cells. We show that human ACTC is incapable of rescuing a yeast endogenous actin (ACT1)-knockout in yeast cells and that coexpression of human ACTC in yeast results in slower growth, making yeast an unsuitable expression system. However, we show that it is possible for yeast cells to express a polymerization-deficient ACTI mutant, thereby allowing us to examine the cell biology of this mutation in the future. Finally, mutant forms of human cardiac actin can be expressed in and purified from insect cells in a properly folded and functional form, permitting important characterization of the biochemical mechanisms responsible for cardiomyopathy development in humans. These studies allow for further research into the biochemical characteristics of previously untenable actin mutant proteins.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".