MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143236746 · doi:10.1002/rcm.2268

Top‐down characterization of proteins and drug‐protein complexes using nanoelectrospray tandem mass spectrometry

2005· article· en· W2143236746 on OpenAlexafffund
Rupasri Mandal, Xing‐Fang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueRapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryTandem mass spectrometryMass spectrometryMyoglobinTop-down proteomicsPeptideChromatographyFragmentation (computing)Protein mass spectrometryPeptide mass fingerprintingBiochemistryProteomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a 'top-down' approach for characterization of proteins, and identification of binding sites in protein-drug complexes using nanoelectrospray ionization hybrid quadrupole time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry (nanoESI-MS/MS). The efficiency of direct fragmentation of intact protein ions and the feasibility of this method were initially demonstrated using several well-characterized proteins with different molecular weights including metallothionein (6126 Da), cytochrome c (horse, 12360 Da), myoglobin (horse, 16592 Da), and hemoglobin (human, 64453 Da). Simply varying collision energy without enzyme digestion and gel or LC separation generated a range of peptide fragments of these proteins. Over 80% of these peptide ions matched those in the SWISS-PROT database with mass accuracy of 8 to 32 ppm with external calibration. This technique was further applied to fragment a cisplatin-metallothionein complex to identify the binding sites, demonstrating a potential application in the study of drug-protein 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 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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRapid Communications in Mass SpectrometrySame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207