MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1517324664 · doi:10.1111/febs.12612

Histatins: salivary peptides with copper(<scp>II</scp>)‐ and zinc(<scp>II</scp>)‐binding motifs

2013· review· en· W1517324664 on OpenAlexaff
Sonia Melino, Celeste Santone, Paolo Di Nardo, Bibudhendra Sarkar

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Journal · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntimicrobial Peptides and Activities
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProteasesPeptideAntimicrobial peptidesBiochemistryCysteineComputational biologyChemistryMicrobiologyBiologyEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural antimicrobial peptides represent a primordial mechanism of immunity in both vertebrate and nonvertebrate organisms. Among them, histatins belong to a family of human salivary metal-binding peptides displaying potent antibacterial, antifungal and wound-healing activities. These properties, along with the ability of histatins to inhibit collagenases and cysteine proteases, have attracted much attention for their potential use in the treatment of several oral diseases. This review critically assesses the studies carried out to date in order to provide a comprehensive and systematic vision of the information accumulated so far. In particular, the relationship between metal-binding and peptide activity is extensively analysed. The review provides important clues for developing possible therapeutic applications of histatins and their synthetic peptide analogues by creating a set of necessary resource materials to support investigators and industries interested in exploiting their unique properties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations113
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS JournalSame topicAntimicrobial Peptides and ActivitiesFrench-language works237,207