DNA sequence recognition in the minor groove by crosslinked polyamides: The effect of N-terminal head group and linker length on binding affinity and specificity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of sequence-reading polyamides or "lexitropsins" with comparable DNA-binding affinities to cellular proteins raises the possibility of artificially regulated gene expression. Covalent linkage of polyamide ligands, with either a hairpin motif or crosslinking methylene bridge, has greatly improved binding affinity by ensuring their side-by-side register. Whereas hairpin polyamides have been investigated extensively, the optimized structure of crosslinked polyamides remains to be determined. This study examines a series of thiazole-imidazole-pyrrole (TIP) monomers and crosslinked dimers to evaluate the effects on selectivity and binding affinity of different N-terminal head groups attached to the leading thiazole ring and differing methylene linker lengths. Quantitative footprinting of a DNA sequence, containing potential match and mismatch sites for both maximum overlap and one-residue stagger binding modes, allowed measurement of binding constants at each putative site. Within an N-terminal amino TIP series, C7 and C8-linked compounds bound most strongly to these sites, whereas maximum binding affinity was observed for a C6 linker with a formyl head group. A C5 linker gave weak binding with either head group. A hydrogen or acetyl head group abrogated binding. Binding was confirmed by gel shift analyses. The highest specificity for the maximum overlap site over the one-residue stagger was observed with TIP-C7-amino. Selectivity of the leading thiazole was modulated by the head group, with N-terminal formyl TIP exhibiting up to 3-fold specificity for AGT over TGT, suggesting that N-formyl-thiazole may provide sequence discrimination of adenine over thymine. Moreover, the leading head group and methylene linker length significantly influences the binding characteristics of crosslinked polyamides.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".