Expression and bioactivity of recombinant segments of human perforinThis paper is one of a selection of papers in this Special Issue, entitled International Symposium on Recent Advances in Molecular, Clinical, and Social Medicine, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer-review process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to prepare an active recombinant human perforin by comparing 5 candidate segments of human perforin. Full-length perforin, MAC1 (28-349 aa), MAC2 (166-369 aa), C-100, and N-60 of human perforin were selected as candidate active segments and designated, respectively, HP1, HP2, HP3, HP4, and HP5. The target genes were amplified by PCR and the products were individually subcloned into pGEM-T. The genes for HP1, HP2, HP3, and HP5 were subcloned into pET-DsbA, whereas pET-41a (+) was used as the expression vector of HP4. The fusion proteins were expressed in Escherichia coli BL21pLysS(DE3) and purified using nickel nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA) agarose affinity chromatography. The hemolysis microassay was used as an activity assay of fusion protein. From this study, we obtained the recombinant plasmids pGEM-T-HP1, -HP2, -HP3, -HP4 and -HP5, consisting of 1600, 960, 600, 300bp, and 180, respectively. From these recombinant plasmids, expression plasmids were successfully constructed and expressed in E. coli BL21pLysS(DE3). The resultant fusion proteins, affinity purified using Ni-NTA, were approximately 80, 58, 45, 44, and 30 kDa, respectively. The recombinant proteins were assayed for activity on hemolysis. HP2 and HP5 were the only recombinant proteins that were active in hemolysis, and the hemolytic function was concentration dependent. These results demonstrate that active recombinant forms of perforin can be synthesized in a prokaryote model. The recombinant N-60 and MAC1 (28-349 aa) of human perforin have the function of forming pores. Our study provides the experimental basis for further investigation on the application of perforin.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".