Angiotensin II vs Its Type I Antagonists: Conformational Requirements for Receptor Binding Assessed from NMR Spectroscopic and Receptor Docking Experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conformations of three angiotensin II (AII) peptide antagonists ([Sar1]-AII(1-7)-NH(2), [Sar1,Val5,Ala8]-AII and the AII antipeptide, [Glu1,Gly2,Val5,Val8]-AII) were assessed in a lipid medium. A common backbone turn was identified through modeling and spectroscopic studies. The His6 residue acted as a pivoting point beyond which each peptide adopted two distinct conformations. One principle conformer resembled that previously determined for AII while the other was designated as an AII antagonist like conformer. A computational overlay between the nonpeptide antagonist, Losartan, and both the AII and the AII like conformation of [Sar1,Val5,Ala8]-AII revealed common pharmacophoric points with RMS deviations between 1 and 1.5 A. Both the AII conformer and the AII antagonist like conformer of [Sar1,Val5,Ala8]-AII were docked into a model of the AT(1) receptor. Receptor residue Phe289 and Asp281 provided good contact points for both peptides. Some differences were also noted. The terminal carboxyl of AII contacted Lys199 of the receptor while that of [Sar1,Val5,Ala8]-AII bridged Arg23 at the top of helix 1. The Asp1 side chain of AII interacted with His183 of the receptor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".