Aggregation of a Tetrasaccharide Acceptor Observed by NMR: Synthesis of Pentasaccharide Fragments of the Le<sup>a</sup>Le<sup>x</sup> Tumor-Associated Hexasaccharide Antigen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the synthesis of a tetrasaccharide and two pentasaccharide fragments of the Le(a)Le(x) tumor-associated carbohydrate antigen α-L-Fuc-(1→4)-[β-D-Gal-(1→3)]-β-D-GlcNAc-(1→3)-β-D-Gal-(1→4)-[α-L-Fuc-(1→3)]-β-D-GlcNAc-(1→OR). The choice of protecting groups permitted a one-step global deprotection (Na/NH3(l)). The protected chlorohexyl glycoside pentasaccharide was the precursor to the hexyl glycoside, to be used as a soluble inhibitor, and the aminohexyl glycoside analogue, to be conjugated to proteins for surface immobilization and immunization experiments. We observed that a linear tetrasaccharide that contained two N-acetylglucosamine residues and a free OH group gave two distinct sets of (1)H NMR signals when the data were acquired in deuterated chloroform. Data acquisition at variable concentrations and variable temperatures suggests that the second set of NMR signals results from aggregation of the tetrasaccharide driven by the formation of intermolecular H-bonds involving the NHAc. While the formation of intra- and intermolecular H-bonds involving N-acetylgucosamine residues has been reported in non-H-bonding solvents, this is, to our knowledge, the first time that these have lead to the appearance of two distinct sets of signals in the NMR spectra. This aggregation may explain the lack of reactivity observed when an attempt is made to glycosylate such an acceptor using non-H-bonding solvents such as dichloromethane.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".