MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036601227

Characterization of PABP-interacting proteins 1 and 2

2003· dissertation· en· W7036601227 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2003
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcGill University
KeywordsPlasma protein bindingSurface plasmon resonanceBinding siteProtein–protein interactionAmino acidRNABinding domainCharacterization (materials science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 3' poly(A) tail of eukaryotic mRNAs and the poly(A) binding protein (PABP) play key roles in the regulation of translation. Recently, our group identified two human PABP-interacting proteins (Paip), Paip1 and Paip2, which stimulate and repress translation, respectively. Paip2 also inhibits the binding of PABP to the poly(A) tail and competes with Paip1 for binding to PABP. My research project was divided into two parts to allow me to gain a greater understanding of the roles of these two PABP-interacting proteins. First, in order to study the mechanism of interaction of Paip1 and PABP, their binding sites were mapped by Far Western and GST pull-downs experiments. The Paip1-PABP interaction involves two distinct binding regions in each protein. The PABP interacting motif-1 (PAM1) of Paip1 is rich in acidic amino acids and is located in the C-terminus (a.a. 440--479). PAM1 interacts with the RNA recognition motifs (RRMs) 1 and 2 of PABP. PAM2 consists of a 15 amino acid stretch residing in the N-terminus of Paip1 (a.a. 123--137) and interacts with the C-terminal domain of PABP. In addition, the stoichiometry and the kinetic and thermodynamic constants for the Paip1-PABP interaction were determined using a Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR)-biosensor. Paip1 interacts with PABP with an apparent KD of 1.9 nM and with a 1:1 stoichiometry. In the second part of my thesis research, the Drosophila Paip2 (dPaip2) was isolated and characterized in order to ascertain a biological role for Paip2. dPaip2 was found to be the bona fide homologue of human Paip2 since it interacts with the Drosophila PABP (dPABP) via two independent binding sites, interferes with the ability of dPABP to bind to poly(A), and represses translation. Ectopic overexpression of dPaip2 in wings resulted in a size reduction phenotype, which was due to a decrease in the cell number but not to a difference in cell size. Clones of cells overexpressing dPaip2 in wing discs also contai

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)0.001
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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesFrench-language works237,207