VO<sup>2+</sup>–hydroxyapatite complexes as models for vanadyl coordination to phosphate in bone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe a 1D and 2D electron spin echo envelope modulation investigation of VO2+ adsorbed on hydroxyapatite (HA) at different concentrations and compare with VO2+–triphosphate (TPH) complexes studied previously in detail, in an effort to provide more insight into the structure of VO2+ coordination in bone. Structures of this interaction are important because of the role of bone in the long-term storage of administered vanadium, and the likely role of bone in the steady-state release of vanadium leading to the chronic insulin-enhancing anti-diabetic effects of vanadyl complexes. Three similar sets of cross-peaks from phosphorus nuclei observed in the 31P hyperfine sublevel correlation (HYSCORE) spectra of VO2+–HA, VO2+–TPH and VO2+–bone suggest a common tridentate binding motif for triphosphate moieties to the vanadyl ion. The similarities between the systems present the possibility that in vivo vanadyl coordination in bone is relatively uniform. Experiments with HA samples containing different amounts of adsorbed VO2+ demonstrate additional peculiarities of the ion–adsorbent interaction which can be expected in vivo. The HYSCORE spectra of HA samples show varying relative intensities of 31P lines from phosphate ligands and 1H lines, especially lines from protons of coordinated water molecules. This result suggests that the number of equatorial phosphate ligands in HA could be different depending on the water content of the sample and the VO2+ concentration; complexes of different structures probably contribute to the spectra of VO2+–HA. Similar behaviour can also be expected in vivo during VO2+ accumulation in bones.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".