MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409941786 · doi:10.1007/978-1-61779-927-3_12

Magic Angle Spinning Solid-State NMR Experiments for Structural Characterization of Proteins

2012· article· en· W2409941786 on OpenAlexaff
Lichi Shi, Vladimir Ladizhansky

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced NMR Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagic angle spinningSolid-state nuclear magnetic resonanceCharacterization (materials science)MicrocrystallineCrystallographyChemistrySpinningMaterials scienceChemical physicsNanotechnologyNuclear magnetic resonanceNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyPhysicsStereochemistryPolymer chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (SSNMR) has become a prominent method in biology and is suitable for the characterization of insoluble proteins and protein aggregates such as amyloid fibrils, membrane-lipid complexes, and precipitated proteins. Often, the initial and the most critical step is to obtain spectroscopic assignments, that is, to determine chemical shifts of individual atoms. The procedures for SSNMR spectroscopic assignments are now well established for small microcrystalline proteins, where high signal-to-noise can be obtained. The sensitivity of the experiments and spectral resolution decrease with the increasing molecular weight, which makes setting SSNMR experiments in large proteins a much more challenging and demanding procedure. Here, we describe the protocol for the most common set of 3D magic angle spinning (MAS) SSNMR experiments. While the procedures described in the text are well known to SSNMR practitioners, we hope they will be of interest to scientists interested in extending their repertoire of biophysical techniques.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.410 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations30
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicAdvanced NMR Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207