MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981628065 · doi:10.1021/cb3006227

Computational Design of Enone-Binding Proteins with Catalytic Activity for the Morita–Baylis–Hillman Reaction

2013· article· en· W1981628065 on OpenAlexaff
Sinisa Bjelic, Lucas G. Nivón, Nihan Çelebi‐Ölçüm, Gert Kiss, Carolyn F. Rosewall, Helena M. Lovick, Erica L. Ingalls, Jasmine L. Gallaher, J. Seetharaman, Scott Lew, G.T. Montelione, J.F. Hunt, Forrest E. Michael, K. N. Houk, David Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Chemical Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsStructural Genomics Consortium
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsEnoneCatalysisMorita therapyChemistryBiologyStereochemistryBiochemistryMathematicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Morita-Baylis-Hillman reaction forms a carbon-carbon bond between the α-carbon of a conjugated carbonyl compound and a carbon electrophile. The reaction mechanism involves Michael addition of a nucleophile catalyst at the carbonyl β-carbon, followed by bond formation with the electrophile and catalyst disassociation to release the product. We used Rosetta to design 48 proteins containing active sites predicted to carry out this mechanism, of which two show catalytic activity by mass spectrometry (MS). Substrate labeling measured by MS and site-directed mutagenesis experiments show that the designed active-site residues are responsible for activity, although rate acceleration over background is modest. To characterize the designed proteins, we developed a fluorescence-based screen for intermediate formation in cell lysates, carried out microsecond molecular dynamics simulations, and solved X-ray crystal structures. These data indicate a partially formed active site and suggest several clear avenues for designing more active catalysts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations105
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Chemical BiologySame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207