Studies on the Dilution Refolding and Aggregation Interaction of Bovine Carbonic Anhydrase B Induced by Urea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dilution refolding and aggregation interaction of bovine carbonic anhydrase B induced by urea were studied by using non-denatured PAGE,SDS-PAGE,size-exclusion chromatography and laser light-scattering. When the final urea concentration in renaturation solutions was higher than 2.0 mol/L,bovine carbonic anhydrase B existed in the renaturation solutions in unimolecular form and bi-molecular aggregate; when the final urea concentration was in the range of 1.0-2.0 mol/L,they existed in a unimolecular form,bi-molecular aggregate and a small amount of multi-molecular aggregate; and when the final urea concentration was lower or equal to 1.0 mol/L,a transparent supernatant and an opaque precipitate were separately formed in the dilution refolding of urea-induced bovine carbonic anhydrase B,a dynamic dissociation equilibrium existed in the bovine carbonic anhydrase B included in the supernatant and that included in the precipitate and in both the supernatant and precipitate,and bovine carbonic anhydrase B existed in a unimolecular form,bi-molecular and a small amount of multi-molecular aggregate. The bi-molecular and multi-molecular aggregates were formed through the hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions between the unimolecular bovine carbonic anhydrase B,and only if the concentrations of these components in renaturation solution were higher than a certain value and the urea concentration in the final renaturation solution was lower than a certain value,an aggregate precipitate could be formed through the non-covalent interactions among these components.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".