MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967292564 · doi:10.1002/pmic.201000157

Top‐down analysis of recombinant histone H3 and its methylated analogs by ESI/FT‐ICR mass spectrometry

2010· article· en· W1967292564 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Han, Christoph H. Borchers

Bibliographic record

VenuePROTEOMICS · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistone H3ChemistryMass spectrometryHistoneRecombinant DNALysineBiochemistryPeptideXenopusAmino acidPeptide sequenceMolecular massChromatographyGeneEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detailed characterization of the amino acid (aa) compositions of recombinant histone H3 (Xenopus laevis) and its Lys-9 mono-, di-, and trimethylated isoforms was carried out by ESI/FT-ICR-MS. The measured molecular masses of these four proteins did not agree with those predicted from the published wild-type histone H3 sequence. Using MS/MS with both collision-activated dissociation and electron capture dissociation, three aa substitutions (Gly102Ala, Cys110Ala, and Gly111Ala) were unambiguously identified in each protein by protein database searching and de novo peptide tag sequencing. In addition, it was determined through accurate mass measurement and elemental composition generation that Lys-9, to which the methyl groups are attached, is not in fact a lysine. Instead, it was identified as a chemical analog of lysine--aminoethylcysteine--in the methylated proteins. After incorporation of these three aa substitutions and the aminoethylcysteine into the protein sequences, the re-calculated molecular masses of four proteins were completely consistent with the measured values within 1 ppm. This work demonstrates the power of top-down MS for a detailed structural confirmation of recombinant proteins, even without prior information on aa substitutions or modifications.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePROTEOMICSSame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207