MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016523706 · doi:10.1002/jssc.200800627

Accurate molecular weight analysis of histones using FFE and RP‐HPLC on monolithic capillary columns

2009· article· en· W2016523706 on OpenAlexaff
Evert‐Jan Sneekes, Jun Han, Monica Elliot, Juan Ausió, Remco Swart, Albert J. R. Heck, Christoph H. Borchers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoneCapillary electrophoresisChromatographyMonolithic HPLC columnChemistryCapillary actionProteomicsDNATranscription (linguistics)ElectrophoresisComputational biologyHigh-performance liquid chromatographyBiochemistryBiologyMaterials scienceGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to their large diversity with respect to post-translational modifications (PTMs), the family of histones provides a major analytical challenge in current proteomics research. Their function has a large impact on the transcription of DNA, and as a result, on the expression of proteins. The variation in PTMs regulates transcription, and, as a result, many methods are being employed for the in-depth analysis of histones. In this paper, we present a separation strategy for histones based on free-flow electrophoresis (FFE) followed by an RP separation on capillary monolithic PS-DVB columns. The capillary columns are directly interfaced with an FT-ICR MS providing an online system for the detection and accurate molecular weight analysis of intact histones.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Separation ScienceSame topicAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207