MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410449779 · doi:10.1002/cbic.201600123

Structure and Stability of Carbohydrate–Lipid Interactions. Methylmannose Polysaccharide–Fatty Acid Complexes

2016· article· en· W2410449779 on OpenAlexafffund
Lan Liu, Iwona Siuda, Michele R. Richards, Justin B. Renaud, Elena N. Kitova, P. Mayer, D. Peter Tieleman, Todd L. Lowary, John S. Klassen

Bibliographic record

VenueChemBioChem · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaAlberta Glycomics CentreUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Glycomics Centre
KeywordsChemistryCarbohydrateDissociation (chemistry)MethylenePolysaccharideStereochemistryMolecular dynamicsFatty acidCrystallographyOrganic chemistryComputational chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report a detailed study of the structure and stability of carbohydrate-lipid interactions. Complexes of a methylmannose polysaccharide (MMP) derivative and fatty acids (FAs) served as model systems. The dependence of solution affinities and gas-phase dissociation activation energies (Ea ) on FA length indicates a dominant role of carbohydrate-lipid interactions in stabilizing (MMP+FA) complexes. Solution (1) H NMR results reveal weak interactions between MMP methyl groups and FA acyl chain; MD simulations suggest the complexes are disordered. The contribution of FA methylene groups to the Ea is similar to that of heats of transfer of n-alkanes from the gas phase to polar solvents, thus suggesting that MMP binds lipids through dipole-induced dipole interactions. The MD results point to hydrophobic interactions and H-bonds with the FA carboxyl group. Comparison of collision cross sections of deprotonated (MMP+FA) ions with MD structures suggests that the gaseous complexes are disordered.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemBioChemSame topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207