MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114557793 · doi:10.1007/s13361-014-0834-y

Solution Dependence of the Collisional Activation of Ubiquitin [M + 7H]<sup>7+</sup> Ions

2014· article· en· W2114557793 on OpenAlexaff
Huilin Shi, Natalya Atlasevich, Samuel I. Merenbloom, David E. Clemmer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSciex (Canada)
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthLilly Endowment
KeywordsChemistryIonUbiquitinMass spectrometryAqueous solutionIon-mobility spectrometryMethanolMoleculeCrystallographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Physical chemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solution dependence of gas-phase unfolding for ubiquitin [M + 7H](7+) ions has been studied by ion mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry (IMS-MS). Different acidic water:methanol solutions are used to favor the native (N), more helical (A), or unfolded (U) solution states of ubiquitin. Unfolding of gas-phase ubiquitin ions is achieved by collisional heating and newly formed structures are examined by IMS. With an activation voltage of 100 V, a selected distribution of compact structures unfolds, forming three resolvable elongated states (E1-E3). The relative populations of these elongated structures depend strongly on the solution composition. Activation of compact ions from aqueous solutions known to favor N-state ubiquitin produces mostly the E1 type elongated state, whereas activation of compact ions from methanol containing solutions that populate A-state ubiquitin favors the E3 elongated state. Presumably, this difference arises because of differences in precursor ion structures emerging from solution. Thus, it appears that information about solution populations can be retained after ionization, selection, and activation to produce the elongated states. These data as well as others are discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations50
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society for Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207