MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068723003 · doi:10.1002/psc.877

Ureido group containing cyclic dermorphin(1–7) analogues: synthesis, biology and conformation

2007· article· en· W2068723003 on OpenAlexafffund
Ewa Witkowska, Michał Nowakowski, Marta Oleszczuk, Katarzyna Filip, Małgorzata Ciszewska, Nga N. Chung, Peter W. Schiller, Jacek Wójcik, Jan Izdebski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Peptide Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChemical Synthesis and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDermorphinChemistryStereochemistryOligopeptideVas deferensPeptideCyclic peptidePeptide synthesisAgonistOpioid peptideOpioidBiochemistryReceptorAnatomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Six cyclic peptides related to dermorphin(1-7) have been synthesized. The synthesis of linear peptides containing diamino acid residues in positions 2 and 4 was carried out on a 4-methylbenzhydrylamine resin, and cyclization was achieved by treatment with bis-(4-nitrophenyl)carbonate to form a urea unit. The peptides were tested in the guinea-pig ileum (GPI) and mouse vas deferens (MVD) assays. Diverse opioid agonist activities were observed, depending on the size of the ring. The results were compared with those obtained earlier for 1-4 dermorphin analogues. The conformations of all six dermorphin analogues were studied. The conformational space of the peptides was examined using the electrostatically driven Monte Carlo method. On the basis of NMR data, an ensemble of conformations was obtained for each peptide. The opioid activity profiles of the compounds are discussed in the light of the structural data.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Peptide ScienceSame topicChemical Synthesis and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207