MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Similarities between <i>N</i>-Acetylcysteine and Glutathione in Binding to Lead(II) Ions

2015· article· en· W2268718167 on OpenAlexafffund
Natalie S. Sisombath, Farideh Jalilehvand

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Research in Toxicology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersBasic Energy SciencesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesBiological and Environmental ResearchGovernment of AlbertaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsAcetylcysteineGlutathioneChemistryLead (geology)IonCombinatorial chemistryBiochemistryAntioxidantBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

N-Acetylcysteine is a natural thiol-containing antioxidant, a precursor for cysteine and glutathione, and a potential detoxifying agent for heavy metal ions. However, previous accounts of the efficiency of N-acetylcysteine (H2NAC) in excretion of lead are few and contradicting. Here, we report results on the nature of lead(II) complexes formed with N-acetylcysteine in aqueous solution, which were obtained by combining information from several spectroscopic methods, including (207)Pb, (13)C, and (1)H NMR, Pb LIII-edge X-ray absorption, ultraviolet-visible (UV-vis) spectroscopy, and electro-spray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI-MS). Two series of solutions were used containing CPb(II) = 10 and 100 mM, respectively, varying the H2NAC/Pb(II) mole ratios from 2.1 to 10.0 at pH 9.1-9.4. The coordination environments obtained resemble those previously found for the Pb(II) glutathione system: at a ligand-to-lead mole ratio of 2.1, dimeric or oligomeric Pb(II) N-acetylcysteine complexes are formed, while a trithiolate [Pb(NAC)3](4-) complex dominates in solutions with H2NAC/Pb(II) mole ratios >3.0.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Research in ToxicologySame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207