MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032017745 · doi:10.1021/ja049538l

Biomimetic Monoacylation of Diols in Water. Lanthanide-Promoted Reactions of Methyl Benzoyl Phosphate

2004· article· en· W2032017745 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa L. Cameron, Sheila C. Wang, Ronald Kluger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemical Synthesis and Reactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryLanthanidePhosphateOrganic chemistryIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The direct monoacylation of diols by acyl phosphate monoesters in water is a biomimetic analogy to the enzymic aminoacylation of tRNA by aminoacyl adenylates. Without catalysis, acyl phosphate monoesters react rapidly with amines but very slowly with water and alcohols. Lanthanide ions dramatically and selectively facilitate the base-catalyzed monoacylation of diols in water by methyl benzoyl phosphate (MBP), a typical acyl phosphate monoester, in neutral solutions where reactive amines are protonated and unreactive. The reaction patterns and reactivity of various diols with MBP in the presence of lanthanides are consistent with a mechanism that involves internal addition from the conjugate base of the bis-bidentate complex of the lanthanide with the diol and MBP. The method is also applicable to reactions of nucleosides as evidenced by the selective monoacylation of the 2'- or 3'-hydroxyl group of adenosine, without reaction of the 5'-hydroxyl group or the 6-amino group. Analogues of adenosine without the diol are unreactive. This suggests that the method will selectively monoacylate the hydroxyl groups at the unique diol in tRNA that forms the 3'-terminus.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations39
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicChemical Synthesis and ReactionsFrench-language works237,207