MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004742488 · doi:10.1002/elps.200305576

Capillary electrophoresis of synthetic peptide standards varying in charge and hydrophobicity

2003· article· en· W2004742488 on OpenAlexaff
Traian Popa, Colin T. Mant, Robert S. Hodges

Bibliographic record

VenueElectrophoresis · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsCapillary electrophoresisChemistryPeptideElectrolyteChromatographyElectrophoresisAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MicelleCapillary actionRandom coilProtein secondary structureAqueous solutionMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryBiochemistryPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mixture of eight structurally closely related synthetic peptides as capillary electrophoretic (CE) standards is introduced. The almost identical mass-to-charge ratio of the standards, coupled with their random-coil (i.e., no secondary structure) nature, offer a potent analytical test for CE to separate peptides varying only subtly in hydrophobicity. Parameters varied to effect a separation included background electrolyte concentration, temperature, applied voltage in capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE in uncoated capillaries), as well as the introduction of hydrophobic mechanisms to the separation either through the use of micelles or C8-coated capillaries. Our step-by-step approach culminated in an optimized combination of a CZE mechanism for separation of differently charged peptide groups (based on common mass-to-charge ratio) and an ion-pairing mechanism (effecting a separation within each group of identically charged peptides), which we have termed ion-interaction CZE or II-CZE. The study clearly shows how the peptide standards allow an excellent assessment of the resolving power of CE.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations14
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectrophoresisSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207