MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126694414 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064547

Promising Aedes aegypti Repellent Chemotypes Identified through Integrated QSAR, Virtual Screening, Synthesis, and Bioassay

2013· article· en· W2126694414 on OpenAlexafffund
Polina V. Oliferenko, Alexander A. Oliferenko, Gennadiy Poda, Dmitry I. Osolodkin, Girinath G. Pillai, Ulrich R. Bernier, Maia Tsikolia, Natasha M. Agramonte, Gary G. Clark, Kenneth J. Linthicum, Alan R. Katritzky

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMosquito-borne diseases and control
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoOntario Ministry of Economic Development and InnovationU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsAedes aegyptiBioassayChikungunyaDengue feverVirtual screeningAedesDocking (animal)BiologyDengue virusComputational biologyDrug discoveryVirologyBioinformaticsVeterinary medicineMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular field topology analysis, scaffold hopping, and molecular docking were used as complementary computational tools for the design of repellents for Aedes aegypti, the insect vector for yellow fever, chikungunya, and dengue fever. A large number of analogues were evaluated by virtual screening with Glide molecular docking software. This produced several dozen hits that were either synthesized or procured from commercial sources. Analysis of these compounds by a repellent bioassay resulted in a few highly active chemicals (in terms of minimum effective dosage) as viable candidates for further hit-to-lead and lead optimization effort.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations52
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicMosquito-borne diseases and controlFrench-language works237,207