MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031051143 · doi:10.1021/la900365g

Interaction of an Antimicrobial Peptide with a Model Lipid Bilayer Using Molecular Dynamics Simulation

2009· article· en· W2031051143 on OpenAlexafffund
Wael Soliman, Subir Bhattacharjee, Kamaljit Kaur

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein purification and stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMolecular dynamicsLipid bilayerPeptideAntimicrobialChemistryDynamics (music)BilayerAntimicrobial peptidesNanotechnologyBiophysicsChemical physicsMaterials sciencePhysicsBiochemistryComputational chemistryMembraneBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results of molecular dynamics simulations of the interaction of a positively charged antimicrobial peptide, carnobacteriocin B2, with a mixed (anionic-zwitterionic) lipid bilayer carrying a net negative charge. When the peptide is initially immersed in an aqueous medium, it approaches the bilayer surface because of electrostatic attraction. Insertion of the single peptide in the bilayer, however, is not spontaneous. Simulations are also conducted by employing initial configurations where the peptide is partially or completely inserted into the bilayer. When the peptide is partially inserted into the bilayer, it experiences a slight loss of helical structure with the appearance of a hinge region in the C-terminal helix. Complete insertion of the peptide in the bilayer results in a stable straight helix with the N- and C-terminals electrostatically tethered to the opposing headgroups of the bilayer. The charged amino acids of the peptide do not cross the charged headgroups of the bilayer in any of the simulations, nor is any bilayer disruption observed in these studies. These results show that single peptides do not spontaneously penetrate lipid membranes and corroborate deductions from previous experimental studies that alternate mechanisms are necessary for their penetration into lipid bilayers.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLangmuirSame topicProtein purification and stabilityFrench-language works237,207