Pyrene–Apelin Conjugation Modulates Fluorophore– and Peptide–Micelle Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bioactive apelin peptide forms ranging in length from 12 to 55 amino acids bind to and activate the apelin receptor (AR or APJ), a class A G-protein coupled receptor. Apelin-12, -17, and -36 isoforms, named according to length, with an additional N-terminal cysteine residue allowed for regiospecific and efficient conjugation of pyrene maleimide. Through steady-state fluorescence spectroscopy, the emission properties of pyrene in aqueous buffer were compared to those of the pyrene-apelin conjugates both without and with zwitterionic or anionic micelles. Pyrene photophysics are consistent with an expected partitioning into the hydrophobic micellar cores, while pyrene-apelin conjugation prevented this partitioning. Apelin, conversely, is expected to preferentially interact with anionic micelles; pyrene-apelin conjugates appear to lose preferential interaction. Finally, Förster resonance energy transfer between pyrene and tryptophan residues in the N-terminal tail and first transmembrane segment (the AR55 construct, comprising residues 1-55 of the AR) was consistent with efficient nonspecific pyrene-apelin conjugate binding to micelles rather than direct, specific apelin-AR55 binding. This approach provides a versatile fluorophore conjugation strategy for apelin, particularly valuable given that even a highly hydrophobic fluorophore is not deleterious to peptide behavior in membrane-mimetic micellar systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 teacher head, 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".