MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982211919 · doi:10.1007/s13361-014-0964-2

Screening Carbohydrate Libraries for Protein Interactions Using the Direct ESI-MS Assay. Applications to Libraries of Unknown Concentration

2014· article· en· W1982211919 on OpenAlexafffund
Elena N. Kitova, Amr El-Hawiet, John S. Klassen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Glycomics CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChromatographyMass spectrometryCarbohydrateComputational biologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A semiquantitative electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI-MS) binding assay suitable for analyzing mixtures of oligosaccharides, at unknown concentrations, for interactions with target proteins is described. The assay relies on the differences in the ratio of the relative abundances of the ligand-bound and free protein ions measured by ESI-MS at two or more initial protein concentrations to distinguish low affinity (≤10(3) M(-1)) ligands from moderate and high affinity (>10(5) M(-1)) ligands present in the library and to rank their affinities. Control experiments were performed on solutions of a single chain antibody and a mixture of synthetic oligosaccharides, with known affinities, in the absence and presence of a 40-component carbohydrate library to demonstrate the implementation and reliability of the assay. The application of the assay for screening natural libraries of carbohydrates against proteins is also demonstrated using mixtures of human milk oligosaccharides, isolated from breast milk, and fragments of a bacterial toxin and human galectin 3.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations25
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society for Mass SpectrometrySame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207