Impact of the Merrifield solid phase method on the design and synthesis of selective agonists and antagonists of oxytocin and vasopressin: A historical perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This tribute to Bruce Merrifield traces the author's fortuitous path in 1964 from Vincent du Vigneaud's laboratory to the laboratory of D. W. Woolley to learn the solid phase method and then to his first faculty position in the Department of Biochemistry, McGill University, Montreal in 1965. It recalls the key roles played from early 1966 to July 1967 by Bruce Merrifield, John Stewart, Arnold Marglin, Herb Takashima, and Vincent du Vigneaud in providing key advice to the author's efforts to use the solid phase method to synthesize oxytocin; while simultaneously the du Vigneaud and Merrifield laboratories were collaborating on the solid phase synthesis of deamino-oxytocin. Both syntheses were published in the same issue of the Journal of American Chemical Society in 1968. Also described is how this breakthrough impacted the author's scientific career: by leading to highly productive collaborative studies, initially with Wilbur H. Sawyer and subsequently with others, on the design and synthesis of selective agonists, antagonists, and radioiodinated ligands for oxytocin and vasopressin receptors. These syntheses were greatly facilitated by the contributions of highly talented graduate students, research technicians, and visiting peptide chemists from Hungary, England, Poland, Bulgaria, and China. Many of these peptides have become very valuable pharmacological tools in studies on the peripheral and central effects of oxytocin and vasopressin: further attesting to the profound impact of the solid phase method as the cornerstone for all the discoveries, which he and his collaborators and coworkers have made over the past 40 years.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".