MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017942919 · doi:10.1039/c3ob40684a

The effect of azobenzene cross-linker position on the degree of helical peptide photo-control

2013· article· en· W2017942919 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed M. Ali, G. Andrew Woolley

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic & Biomolecular Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryLinkerAzobenzeneHelix (gastropod)PeptideCrystallographyHelicityResidue (chemistry)StereochemistryMoleculeBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photo-switchable α-helical peptides offer a valuable tool to probe protein-biomacromolecule interactions in a spatiotemporally controlled manner. We synthesized a series of 32 residue peptides (AA32 s) with the core structure Ac-W-(E1A2A3A4R5)6-Q-NH2 and introduced the azobenzene based cross-linker BSBCA via reaction with Cys residues spaced at i, i + 7 intervals in different positions along the helix. UV/Vis measurements show that the composition of the photostationary state as well as thermal relaxation rates do not change considerably with changes in cross-linker position. CD analysis shows that photo-control of helix folding/unfolding is most effective when the cross-linker is targeted to the middle of the peptide so long as this segment has a high intrinsic helical propensity. The largest degree of photo-controlled conformational change occurred when a cross-linked central region of high intrinsic helicity was followed on the C-terminal side by a region of lower intrinsic helicity. This indicates the BSBCA cross-linker can act as a nucleation site for N-to-C propagation of a helix. These data help to guide the choice of cross-linking site in larger peptides and proteins where photo-control of conformation is desired.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic & Biomolecular ChemistrySame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207