Binding Patterns and Structure–Affinity Relationships of Food Azo Dyes with Lysozyme: A Multitechnique Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food dyes serve to beguile consumers: they are often used to imitate the presence of healthful, colorful food produce such as fruits and vegetables. But considering the hurtful impact of these chemicals on the human body, it is time to thoroughly uncover the toxicity of these food dyes at the molecular level. In the present contribution, we have examined the molecular reactions of protein lysozyme with model food azo compound Color Index (C.I.) Acid Red 2 and its analogues C.I. Acid Orange 52, Solvent Yellow 2, and the core structure of azobenzene using a combination of biophysical methods at physiological conditions. Fluorescence, circular dichroism (CD), time-resolved fluorescence, UV-vis absorption as well as computer-aided molecular modeling were used to analyze food dye affinity, binding mode, energy transfer, and the effects of food dye complexation on lysozyme stability and conformation. Fluorescence emission spectra indicate complex formation at 10(-5) M dye concentration, and this corroborates time-resolved fluorescence results showing the diminution in the tryptophan (Trp) fluorescence mainly via a static type (KSV = 1.505 × 10(4) M(-1)) and Förster energy transfer. Structural analysis displayed the participation of several amino acid residues in food dye protein adducts, with hydrogen bonds, π-π and cation-π interactions, but the conformation of lysozyme was unchanged in the process, as derived from fluorescence emission, far-UV CD, and synchronous fluorescence spectra. The overall affinity of food dye is 10(4) M(-1) and there exists only one kind of binding domain in protein for food dye. These data are consistent with hydrophobic probe 8-anilino-1-naphthalenesulfonic acid (ANS) displacement, and molecular modeling manifesting the food dye binding patch was near to Trp-62 and Trp-63 residues of lysozyme. On the basis of the computational analyses, we determine that the type of substituent on the azobenzene structure has a powerful influence on the toxicity of food dyes. Results from this work testify that model protein, though an indirect method, provides a more comprehensive profile of the essence of toxicity evaluation of food dyes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".