MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985041383 · doi:10.1110/ps.4390102

Covalent cross‐linking of proteins without chemical reagents

2002· article· en· W1985041383 on OpenAlexafffund
Brigitte Simons, M. Christine King, Terry D. Cyr, Mary Alice Hefford, Harvey Kaplan

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaHealth Canada
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsCovalent bondDimerChemistryMoleculeRNase PPeptide bondMonomerReagentAmideLysozymeMacromoleculeStereochemistryOrganic chemistryEnzymeBiochemistryPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A facile method for the formation of zero-length covalent cross-links between protein molecules in the lyophilized state without the use of chemical reagents has been developed. The cross-linking process is performed by simply sealing lyophilized protein under vacuum in a glass vessel and heating at 85 degrees C for 24 h. Under these conditions, approximately one-third of the total protein present becomes cross-linked, and dimer is the major product. Chemical and mass spectroscopic evidence obtained shows that zero-length cross-links are formed as a result of the condensation of interacting ammonium and carboxylate groups to form amide bonds between adjacent molecules. For the protein examined in the most detail, RNase A, the cross-linked dimer has only one amide cross-link and retains the enzymatic activity of the monomer. The in vacuo cross-linking procedure appears to be general in its applicability because five different proteins tested gave substantial cross-linking, and co-lyophilization of lysozyme and RNase A also gave a heterogeneous covalently cross-linked dimer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.297 · 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
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

Citations38
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtein ScienceSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207