MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does the DNA Binding Mode of a Molecule Affect its Ability to Interact With Singlet Oxygen?

2009· article· en· W2071859231 on OpenAlexaff
Vivian M. Lau, Belinda Heyne

Bibliographic record

VenuePhotochemistry and Photobiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganic Chemistry Cycloaddition Reactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSinglet oxygenAffect (linguistics)DNAMoleculeChemistryBiophysicsMode (computer interface)OxygenBiologyBiochemistryPsychologyCommunicationComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Singlet oxygen is known to be a potent mutagenic agent and several biologically relevant molecules have been proposed to act as scavengers for this noxious species. However, numerous studies have been conducted in homogenous solution and the reactivity of singlet oxygen scavengers known to bind DNA has never been investigated in double-stranded DNA. In the following paper, we present the results obtained regarding the interaction between 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) and singlet oxygen. We show the molecule to be a potent scavenger of singlet oxygen in aqueous solution with an absolute rate constant (chemical and physical quenching of singlet oxygen) of (1.7+/-0.3)x10(7) m(-1) s(-1). In addition, we demonstrate that the binding mode of a singlet oxygen scavenger to DNA can strongly influence its reactivity toward singlet oxygen. In the case of DAPI, while the molecule exhibits a chemical reaction with singlet oxygen when the molecule is free in aqueous solution or intercalated in GC sequences of DNA, DAPI becomes chemically unreactive toward singlet oxygen when bound in the minor groove of DNA AT sequences.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhotochemistry and PhotobiologySame topicOrganic Chemistry Cycloaddition ReactionsFrench-language works237,207