MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1607106830

X-ray diffraction of a gram-negative bacterial membrane mimetic

2009· dissertation· en· W1607106830 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Panteha. Razavi

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University) · 2009
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBrock University
KeywordsGramDiffractionMembraneMaterials scienceChemistryPhysicsBiologyBacteriaOpticsGeneticsBiochemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis applies x-ray diffraction to measure he membrane structure of lipopolysaccharides and to develop a better model of a LPS bacterial melilbrane that can be used for biophysical research on antibiotics that attack cell membranes. \iVe ha'e Inodified the Physics department x-ray machine for use 3.'3 a thin film diffractometer, and have lesigned a new temperature and relative humidity controlled sample cell.\Ve tested the sample eel: by measuring the one-dimensional electron density profiles of bilayers of pope with 0%, 1%, 1G :VcJ, and 100% by weight lipo-polysaccharide from Pse'udo'lTwna aeTuginosa. Background VVe now know that traditional p,ntibiotics ,I,re losing their effectiveness against ever-evolving bacteria. This is because traditional antibiotic: work against specific targets within the bacterial cell, and with genetic mutations over time, themtibiotic no longer works. One possible solution are antimicrobial peptides. These are short proteins that are part of the immune systems of many animals, and some of them attack bacteria directly at the membrane of the cell, causing the bacterium to rupture and die. Since the membranes of most bacteria share common structural features, and these featuret, are unlikely to evolve very much, these peptides should effectively kill many types of bacteria wi Lhout much evolved resistance. But why do these peptides kill bacterial cel: '3 , but not the cells of the host animal? For gramnegative bacteria, the most likely reason is that t Ileir outer membrane is made of lipopolysaccharides (LPS), which is very different from an animal :;ell membrane. Up to now, what we knovv about how these peptides work was likely done with r !10spholipid models of animal cell membranes, and not with the more complex lipopolysa,echaricies, If we want to make better pepticies, ones that we can use to fight all types of infection, we need a more accurate molecular picture of how they \vork. This will hopefully be one step forward to the ( esign of better treatments for bacterial infections.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock University Digital Repository (Brock University)Same topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207