Selective Crystallization of Proteins Using Engineered Nanonucleants
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study reports for the first time a detailed experimental investigation of protein crystallization in engineered nanoconfined spaces with both controlled pore diameters and narrow pore size distributions. We propose a systematic approach for controlling the nucleation and crystallization of biological macromolecules based on a relationship between the protein radius of gyration ( R g ) and specific pore diameter. A series of nanonucleants with ordered mesopores having narrow pore size distributions were prepared. The templates were tested for proteins ranging in molecular weight from 14 to 450 kDa. Well-formed protein crystals were obtained on only one of the five presented nanonucleants for all protein cases tested, highlighting the unique template selectivity exhibited by these nucleants. In addition, concanavalin A and catalase were both crystallized at ∼2 times lower supersaturation levels than previously reported by any known method. Our observations fully support theoretical studies that predict the enhanced thermodynamic stability of proteins in nanoconfined cavities, including specifically the importance of nucleant pore diameter with respect to protein radius of gyration. The nucleants described here could have major industrial applications for downstream separation and purification of biopharmaceuticals, as well as improved opportunities for the crystallization of complex proteins for structural determination.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it