MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969847041 · doi:10.1021/ac000176j

Protein Concentration and Enzyme Digestion on Microbeads for MALDI-TOF Peptide Mass Mapping of Proteins from Dilute Solutions

2000· article· en· W1969847041 on OpenAlexafffund
Alan A. Doucette, David Craft, Liang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalytical Chemistry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyTrypsinPeptideLysozymeSodium dodecyl sulfateBovine serum albuminMass spectrometryMicrobead (research)Aqueous solutionMatrix-assisted laser desorption/ionizationAdsorptionEnzymeBiochemistryDesorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for generating peptide mass maps from dilute protein samples is presented. The method involves the concentration of proteins from aqueous solution by adsorption onto reversed-phase polymeric microbeads. These beads are then washed extensively to remove contaminants, after which the bound proteins are digested with trypsin. Analysis of the digestion products is performed by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry following direct deposition of the beads on a MALDI target, along with the matrix solution. The procedure is demonstrated using solutions of cytochrome c, lysozyme, and bovine serum albumin. The results of these digests are compared to trypsin digestions of the protein samples without sample preconcentration. Comparative results are also presented for protein solutions contaminated with 2 M NaCl, 2 M urea, or sodium dodecyl sulfate at concentrations up to 0.02%. These results reveal that, with the microbead preconcentration procedure, peptide mass maps can routinely be generated from highly contaminated samples with a protein concentration of only 100 nM.

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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations83
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalytical ChemistrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207