Molecular Mimicry in Mercury Toxicology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular mimicry occurs when one molecular entity is "mistaken" for another by cellular or other biological processes, and is thought to arise from structural similarities between the two molecules in question. It has been postulated by others to be important in the mechanism of uptake of toxic metal species into living tissues. A widely accepted example is the transport of methylmercury-cysteine species, which are thought to mimic the amino acid methionine. We have used mass spectrometry and mercury L(III)-edge X-ray absorption spectroscopy to understand the solution structure of complexes between methylmercury and cysteine. With a view to understanding the basis of the suggested molecular mimicry mechanisms, we have used computational chemistry to compare the structure of methionine with that of the dominant solution species L-cysteinato(methyl)mercury(II), and the structure of cystine with that of mercury(II) bis-L-cysteineate. We conclude that the structural similarities between metal compounds and natural products are insufficient to support a mechanism based on molecular mimicry, but instead, mechanisms involving a less-specific mimicry based on similarity with the L(alpha) region of the amino acid part of the molecule.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".