Significant Strength of Charged DNA–Protein π–π Interactions: A Preliminary Study of Cytosine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present work characterized the preferred gas-phase structure and optimum interaction energy of both parallel stacked and perpendicular T-shaped dimers between cytosine (C), as a representative nucleobase, and aspartic/glutamic acid (DE), aspartate/glutamate (DE(-)) or arginine (R(+)), using detailed M06-2X/6-31+G(d,p) potential energy surface scans as a function of the relative monomer orientation. Through comparison to previous literature on the π-π interactions between the DNA nucleobases and the aromatic amino acid residues, this work will allow for comparisons between DNA-protein interactions involving aromatic and acyclic R-side chains, as well as comparisons of the relative geometric dependence and magnitude of π-π (C:DE), πcation-π (C:R(+)), and πanion-π (C:DE(-)) interactions. Our results show that the preferred relative monomer orientation is highly dependent on the monomer composition and charge, and is dictated by electrostatic-driven interactions. More importantly, for the first time, we report that the π-π interactions between cytosine and (neutral) aspartic/glutamic acid are up to approximately -40 kJ mol(-1), while the πcation-π or πanion-π interactions between cytosine and arginine or aspartate/glutamate are up to approximately -90 and -99 kJ mol(-1), respectively. An extensive investigation of the effects of the computational methodology implemented, including comparisons to detailed CCSD(T)/CBS potential energy surfaces and interaction energies, supports the use of M06-2X, as well as ωB97X-D, to study DNA-protein π-π interactions of varying composition and charge. Most importantly, the CCSD(T)/CBS results verify the strong nature of these DNA-protein π-π interactions, as well as the unique nature of the πcation-π and πanion-π counterparts. Therefore, our results emphasize that a wide variety of different types of noncovalent interactions between both cyclic and acyclic π-containing components can significantly contribute to the stability of DNA-protein complexes and likely play a larger role in biology than currently accepted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".