MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980509877 · doi:10.1002/rcm.2512

Deviation from the mobile proton model in amino‐modified peptides: implications for multiple reaction monitoring analysis of peptides

2006· article· en· W1980509877 on OpenAlexaff
Steven J. Locke, Andrew D. Leslie, Jeremy E. Melanson, Devanand M. Pinto

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityInstitute for Marine Biosciences
FundersGenomic Health
KeywordsChemistryFragmentation (computing)PeptideTandem mass spectrometryAmino acidSelected reaction monitoringMass spectrumTandemCombinatorial chemistryIonTyrosineMass spectrometryChromatographyBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of peptide fragmentation is important to the understanding of chemical processes occurring in the gas phase and the more practical concern of peptide identification for proteomic analysis. Using the mobile proton model as a framework, we explore the effect of amino-group modifications on peptide fragmentation. Three aldehydes are used to transform the peptides' primary amino groups into either a dimethylamino or a heterocyclic structure (five- or six-membered). The observed fragmentation patterns deviate strongly from those observed for the analogous underivatised peptides. In particular, the a1 ion is the base peak in most tandem mass spectra of the derivatised peptides. The a1 ion intensity depends strongly on the N-terminal amino acid, with tyrosine and phenylalanine having the strongest enhancement. Despite the change in fragmentation patterns of the derivatised peptides, they still provide high-quality tandem mass spectra that, in many cases, are more amenable to database searching than the spectra of underivatised peptides. In addition, the reliable presence of the a1 ion facilitates rapid quantitative measurements using the multiple reaction monitoring approach.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Communications in Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207