MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W131745126 · doi:10.29173/eureka10294

Sterol Chemical Structure and Conformation Influence the Thermotropic Phase Behaviour of Dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine Bilayers

2011· article· en· W131745126 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Matthew G.K. Benesch, David A. Mannock, Ronald N. McElhaney

Bibliographic record

VenueEureka · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLipid Membrane Structure and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation pour la Recherche Médicale
KeywordsDipalmitoylphosphatidylcholineThermotropic crystalSterolBilayerChemistryMiscibilityDifferential scanning calorimetryMoleculePhospholipidLipid bilayerCrystallographyPhase (matter)MembraneOrganic chemistryCholesterolThermodynamicsBiochemistryPhosphatidylcholinePolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studying the nature of interactions between the sterol ring system and neigbouring phospholipid molecules is important for our understanding of the properties of sterols in biological molecules and the role of such interactions in many disease processes. In this project, the thermotropic phase behaviour of binary dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine (DPPC)/sterol mixtures with different sterol ring configurations (C5,6 double bond, 5α-H and 5β-H orientation and either 3α-OH, 3β-OH, 3-ketone functional groups) was investigated using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and was compared to earlier studies of cholesterol/ and epicholesterol/DPPC mixtures. Given the differences in the thermodynamic parameters obtained from these mixtures and their associated changes in bilayer stability and miscibility, it is clear that changing the sterol chemical configuration has a significant effect on bilayer properties. Any sterol molecule whose ring structure deviates from that of cholesterol is unlikely to be fully miscible in mammalian membranes.

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)0.000
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEurekaSame topicLipid Membrane Structure and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207