Ion-Ion and ion-molecule reactions at the surface of proteins produced by nanospray. Information on the number of acidic residues and control of the number of ionized acidic and basic residues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mass Spectra of charge states of folded proteins were obtained with nanospray and aqueous solution containing 20 microM the protein (ubiquitin, cytochrome c, lysozyme) and one of the NaA salts NaCl, NaI, NaAc (acetate) (1-10 mM). At very low collision activated decomposition (CAD), the mass spectra of a protein with charge z exhibited a replacement of zH+ with zNa+ and also multiple adducts of NaA. Higher CAD converts the NaA adduct peaks to Na minus H peaks. These must be due to loss of HA where the H was provided by the protein. The degree of HA loss with increasing CAD followed the order I < Cl < Ac. Significantly, the intensity of the ions with n (Na minus H) adducts showed a downward break past an n(MAX) which is equal to the number of acidic residues of the protein plus the charge of the protein. All the observations could be rationalized within the framework of the electrospray mechanism and the charge residue model, which predict that due to extensive evaporation of solvent, the solutes will reach very high concentrations in the final charged droplets. At such high concentrations, positive ions such as Na+, NH4+ form ion pairs with ionized acidic residues and the negative A- form ion pairs with ionized basic residues of the protein. Adducts of Na+, and NaA to backbone amide groups occur also. This reaction mechanism fits all the experimental observations and provides predictions that the number of acidic and basic groups at the surface of the gaseous protein that remain ionized can be controlled by the absence or presence of additives to the solution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".