MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157950340 · doi:10.1110/ps.0376003

High‐yield expression of isotopically labeled peptides for use in NMR studies

2003· article· en· W2157950340 on OpenAlexafffund
Darrin A. Lindhout, Angela Thiessen, Dean Schieve, Brian D. Sykes

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsPeptideHistidineChemistryNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyYield (engineering)Recombinant DNABiochemistryFusion proteinAmino acidCleavage (geology)Peptide sequenceLysineMass spectrometryCombinatorial chemistryChromatographyStereochemistryBiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fusion protein constructs of the 56 amino acid globular protein GB-1 with various peptide sequences, coupled with the incorporation of a histidine tag for affinity purification, have generated high-yield fusion protein constructs. Methionine residues were inserted into the constructs to generate pure peptides following CNBr cleavage, yielding a system that is efficient and cost effective for isotopic labeling of peptides for NMR studies and other disciplines such as mass spectroscopy. Six peptides of varying sequences and hydrophobicities were expressed using this GB-1 fusion protein technique and produced soluble fusion protein constructs in all cases. The ability to easily express and purify recombinant peptides in high yields is applicable for biomedical research and has medicinal and pharmaceutical applications.

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)0.001
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: 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
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations27
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtein ScienceSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207