Analysis of insecticidal proteins from <b><i>Bacillus thuringiensis</i></b> and recombinant <b><i>Escherichia coli</i></b> by capillary electrokinetic chromatography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacillus thuringiensis and recombinant Escherichia coli proteinaceous protoxins were subject to proteolysis and analyzed by capillary electrokinetic chromatography. Three resulting toxins (65 kDa) were baseline-resolved within 22 min using a 10 mM borate, pH 11 separation buffer consisting of 25 mM sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and 30 mM phytic acid. The toxins displayed differential interactions with the SDS and phytic acid phases to effect their separation. The ion-pairing interaction between the analyte and phytic acid was also useful in preventing adsorption to the capillary walls and thus enhanced separation resolution and efficiency. The use of electrokinetic chromatography allows achievement of the separation in a significantly shorter time than conventional high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) using a diethylaminoethyl (DEAE) weak-anion exchanger.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".