Probing opioid receptor–ligand interactions by employment of indolizidin‐9‐one amino acid as a constrained Gly<sup>2</sup>‐Gly<sup>3</sup> surrogate in a leucine‐enkephalin mimic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between the conformation and biological activity of Leu-enkephalin was studied using (2S,6R,8S)-9-oxo-8-N-(Boc)amino-1-azabicyclo[4.3.0]nonane-2-carboxylic acid [(2S,6R,8S)-1, I(9)AA] as a constrained Gly(2)-Gly(3) dipeptide surrogate. [I(9)AA](2,3)-Leu-enkephalin 12 was assembled using solid-phase peptide synthesis on Merrifield resin with TBTU as the coupling reagent. The in vitro assays indicated that [I(9)AA](2,3)-Leu-enkephalin 12 exhibited affinities for the mu- and delta-opioid receptors that were three orders of magnitude lower than that of Leu-enkephalin, as well as partial agonist character for both receptors. In in vivo assays for spinal analgesia, the indolizidinone analog 12 showed significantly enhanced duration of action, indicating an increased metabolic stability. Conformational analysis was performed using NMR and CD spectroscopy. The amide temperature coefficients and 3J(NH-CalphaH) coupling constants for 12 could not support a hydrogen-bonded beta-turn structure; however, its CD spectrum indicated a turn conformation. Incorporation of indolizidinone amino acid 1 into Leu-enkephalin thus provided additional support for the importance of a turn conformation for the biological activity of the native peptide.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".