MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2371884222

Study on Characterizations of Immobilized S-adenosylmethionine Synthetase on Chitosan Microspheres

2013· article· en· W2371884222 on OpenAlexaff
Yin Chun-l

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Science and Biotechnology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBiochemical and Molecular Research
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlutaraldehydeImmobilized enzymeChemistryChitosanEnzymeChromatographyEnzyme assaySubstrate (aquarium)Nuclear chemistryBiochemistryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S-adenosylmethionine(SAM) synthetase was expressed in E. coli,and then the purified SAM synthetase was immobilized on chitosan microspheres with glutaraldehyde crosslinking.Properties of the immobilized enzyme were identified. The results showed the optimal conditions for the immobilization of the enzyme were as follows:the mass fraction of chitosan was 2.5%;the volume fraction of glutaraldehyde was 0.8%;the amount of enzyme was 6 mg/mL gel;the immobilization time was 12 hours. Under these conditions,the activity yield of the immobilized enzyme was 76%. The immobilized enzyme showed a good stability compared with the free enzyme.After incubation at 55 ℃ for 5 h the immobilized enzyme maintained 53% of the original activity while the free enzyme lost all activity at 50 ℃ for 5 h. The immobilized enzyme also showed a good stability in alkaline solution. It still kept more than 80% of the original activity when incubated in the buffer of pH 7.5~9.0 at 4 ℃ for 10 h. The immobilized enzyme was employed to synthesize the SAM and it remained 64% activity after five times repeated operations. The substrate conversion rate was more than 95% in the presence of 30 mmol/L adenosine triphosphate(ATP)。

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food Science and BiotechnologySame topicBiochemical and Molecular ResearchFrench-language works237,207