Association of the Minor Groove Binding Drug Hoechst 33258 with d(CGCGAATTCGCG)<sub>2</sub>: Volumetric, Calorimetric, and Spectroscopic Characterizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We employed ultrasonic velocimetry, high-precision densimetry, circular dichroism and fluorescence spectroscopy, and isothermal titration calorimetry to characterize the binding of Hoechst 33258 to the d(CGCGAATTCGCG)(2) oligomeric duplex at 25 degrees C. We used this experimental combination to determine the full thermodynamic profile for the binding of Hoechst 33258 to the DNA. Specifically, we report changes in binding free energy, enthalpy, entropy, volume, and adiabatic compressibility accompanying the binding. We interpret our volumetric data in terms of hydration and evaluate the number of waters of hydration that become released to or taken up from the bulk. Our calorimetric data reveal that the drug-DNA binding event studied in this work is entropy-driven and proceeds with an unfavorable change in enthalpy. The favorable binding entropy predominantly results from hydration changes. In contrast to a large and positive change in hydrational entropy, the binding-induced change in configurational entropy is insignificant. The latter observation is consistent with the "lock-and-key" mode of minor groove binding.
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".