MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170112869 · doi:10.1021/bm301493u

Solid-State NMR Structure Determination of Whole Anchoring Threads from the Blue Mussel Mytilus edulis

2012· article· en· W2170112869 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre A. Arnold, Frédéric Byette, Marc-Olivier Séguin-Heine, André LeBlanc, Lekha Sleno, Réjean Tremblay, Christian Pellerin, Isabelle Marcotte

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomacromolecules · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced NMR Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMytilusBlue musselMusselAnchoringChemistryEcologyBiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The molecular structure of the blue mussel Mytilus edulis whole anchoring threads was studied by two-dimensional (13)C solid-state NMR on fully labeled fibers. This unique material proves to be well ordered at a molecular level despite its heterogeneous composition as evidenced by the narrow measured linewidths below 1.5 ppm. The spectra are dominated by residues in collagen environments, as determined from chemical shift analysis, and a complete two-dimensional assignment (including minor amino acids) was possible. The best agreement between predicted and experimental backbone chemical shifts was obtained for collagen helices with torsion angles (-75°, +150°). The abundant glycine and alanine residues can be resolved in up to five different structural environments. Alanine peaks could be assigned to collagen triple-helices, β-sheets (parallel and antiparallel), β-turns, and unordered structures. The use of ATR-FTIR microscopy confirmed the presence of these structural environments and enabled their location in the core of the thread (collagen helices and antiparallel β-sheets) or its cuticle (unordered structures). The approach should enable characterization at the molecular level of a wide range of byssus macroscopic properties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomacromoleculesSame topicAdvanced NMR Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207