In this task, you're given a paragraph and title from the research paper. Your task is to classify whether the given title is suitable or not for the research paper based on the given paragraph. Return "True" if title is proper according to paragraph else "False".

[Q]: Paragraph: Bovine renal brush-border membrane vesicle aminopeptidase N at various stages of purity was treated with two bifunctional cross-linking agents. A pattern of emergence of higher molecular weight forms was observed. By using a cleavable cross-linker, aminopeptidase N was shown to cross-link both to itself and to its breakdown products as well as to dipeptidyl peptidase IV. Using this technique it was possible to identify three of the breakdown products as 45 kDa, 66 kDa and 95 kDa peptides. N-terminal amino acid sequence analysis was used to define the precise cleavage points for the bovine renal aminopeptidase N breakdown products. The short amino acid sequences obtained show strong sequence similarity with the human intestinal and rat kidney aminopeptidase N.
Title: The oligomeric structure of renal aminopeptidase N from bovine brush-border membrane vesicles
[A]: False

[Q]: Paragraph: The A1 ribosomal frameshifting requires the existence of an in cis RNA slippery sequence and is promoted by a downstream stimulator RNA. An atypical RNA pseudoknot with an extra stem formed by complementary sequences within loop 2 of an H-type pseudoknot is characterized in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS CoV) genome. This pseudoknot can serve as an efficient stimulator for A1 frameshifting in vitro. Mutational analysis of the extra stem suggests frameshift efficiency can be modulated via manipulation of the secondary structure within the loop 2 of an infectious bronchitis virus-type pseudoknot. More importantly, an upstream RNA sequence separated by a linker 5 0 to the slippery site is also identified to be capable of modulating the A1 frameshift efficiency. RNA sequence containing this attenuation element can downregulate A1 frameshifting promoted by an atypical pseudoknot of SARS CoV and two other pseudoknot stimulators. Furthermore, frameshift efficiency can be reduced to half in the presence of the attenuation signal in vivo. Therefore, this in cis RNA attenuator represents a novel negative determinant of general importance for the regulation of A1 frameshift efficiency, and is thus a potential antiviral target.
Title: An atypical RNA pseudoknot stimulator and an upstream attenuation signal for A1 ribosomal frameshifting of SARS coronavirus
[A]: False

[Q]: Paragraph: Background: Sporozoite immunization of animals and humans under a chemo-prophylactic cover of chloroquine (CPS-CQ) efficiently induces sterile protection against malaria. In humans, CPS-CQ is strikingly more efficient than immunization with radiation attenuated sporozoites (RAS), raising the hypothesis that this might be partially due to CQ. Chloroquine, an established anti-malarial drug, is also well known for its immune modulating properties including improvement of cross-presentation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether co-administration of CQ during sporozoite immunization improves cellular responses and protective efficacy in Plasmodium berghei models. Methods: A number of experiments in selected complimentary P. berghei murine models in Balb/cByJ and C57BL/6j mice was performed. First, the effect of CQ administration on the induction of protection and immune responses by RAS immunization was studied. Next, the effect of CQ on the induction of circumsporozoite (CS) protein-specific CD8 + T cells by immunization with P. berghei parasites expressing a mutant CS protein was investigated. Finally, a direct comparison of CPS-CQ to CPS with mefloquine (MQ), an anti-malarial with little known immune modulating effects, was performed. Results: When CQ was co-administered during immunization with graded numbers of RAS, this did not lead to an increase in frequencies of total memory CD8 + T cells or CS protein-specific CD8 + T cells. Also parasite-specific cytokine production and protection remained unaltered. Replacement of CQ by MQ for CPS immunization resulted in significantly reduced percentages of IFN producing memory T cells in the liver (p = 0.01), but similar protection. Conclusions: This study does not provide evidence for a direct beneficial effect of CQ on the induction of sporozoite-induced immune responses and protection in P. berghei malaria models. Alternatively, the higher efficiency of CPS compared to RAS might be explained by an indirect effect of CQ through limiting blood-stage exposure after immunization or to increased antigen exposure and, therefore, improved breadth of the immune response.
Title: Studying the effect of chloroquine on sporozoite-induced protection and immune responses in Plasmodium berghei malaria
[A]:
True