MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043428197 · doi:10.1139/v05-206

Structural and sequence effects in the fragmentation of protonated tripeptides containing tyrosine

2005· article· en· W2043428197 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Alex G. Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryTripeptideProtonationStereochemistryDipeptideFragmentation (computing)Peptide bondCollision-induced dissociationBond cleavageTandem mass spectrometryTyrosineMass spectrometryAmino acidIonOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fragmentation reactions of a variety of protonated tripeptides containing tyrosine in the three possible positions have been studied by energy-resolved collision-induced dissociation mass spectrometry. The primary fragmentation reactions involve cleavage of the N-terminal and (or) C-terminal amide bond with the relative importance of the two cleavages depending strongly on the identity and position of the amino acid residues in the tripeptide. The results are interpreted in terms of the a1–y mechanism for cleavage of the N-terminal amide bond and the bx–yz mechanism for cleavage of the C-terminal amide bond and, indeed, provide support for these mechanisms. However, it appears likely that, for protonated H-Val-Tyr-Pro-OH, the neutral accompanying formation of the y1 (protonated proline) ion is a cyclic dipeptide (cyclo-Val-Tyr) rather than the oxazolone predicted by the bx–yz mechanism.Key words: tyrosine-containing peptides, fragmentation mechanisms, tandem mass spectrometry.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207