MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050015181 · doi:10.1080/10934520903467980

Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) studies for predicting activation of the ryanodine receptor type 1 channel complex (RyR1) by polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners

2010· article· en· W2050015181 on OpenAlexaff
Sierra Rayne, Kaya Forest

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part A · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsOkanagan CollegePenticton Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative structure–activity relationshipCongenerChemistryRyanodine receptorRYR1Polychlorinated biphenylBiphenylMolecular descriptorLooStereochemistryEnvironmental chemistryReceptorBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) was developed to predict the congener specific ryanodine receptor type RyR1 activity of all 209 polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) congeners. A three-variable QSAR equation was obtained via stepwise forward linear regression on an unsupervised forward selection reduced data set from an initial database. Application of the QSAR towards predicting EC(2x) values for all 209 PCB congeners indicated good agreement in substitution pattern trends between the experimental and estimated data sets. The QSAR model predicts a less than two-fold increase in maximal potency among all congeners outside the experimental database, and it appears that no high-potency PCB congeners with EC(2x) values much less than 0.2 microM exist. Increasing RyR1-neuro toxicity equivalents with increasing homologue number and Aroclor chlorination likely reflect indirect molecular controls on toxicity, since congeners with multiple ortho substituents-the primary structural feature controlling a lack of coplanarity and resulting neurotoxicity-are more likely to be found in higher homologues.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part ASame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207