MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design Novel Selective Inhibitors of Class II Fructose‐1,6‐bisphosphate Aldolase

2008· article· en· W369943991 on OpenAlexafffund
Liang‐Chen Wang, Geneviève Labbé, Anthony P. Krismanich, Gary I. Dmitrienko, J. Guy Guillemette

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEnzyme Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAldolase AFructose-bisphosphate aldolaseBiochemistryAldolase BStereochemistryChemistryActive siteEnzymeBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fructose‐1,6‐bisphosphate (FBP) aldolase (E.C. ) catalyzes the reversible aldol condensation of dihydroxyacetonephosphate (DHAP) and glyceraldehyde‐3‐phosphate in glycolysis, gluconeogenesis and Calvin cycle. FBP aldolases are categorized into two groups based on different catalytic mechanisms: Class I aldolases form a Schiff‐base intermediate with the substrate through an active site lysine residue, whereas Class II aldolases contain a divalent metal which coordinates and stabilizes the carbanion intermediate. Noticeably, Class II aldolase does not exist in animals or plants, making this enzyme a potential drug target for pathogenic microbial organisms such as Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Magnaporthe grisea , Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Bacillus anthracis . Our research group has found that a commercially available antidote for heavy metal poisoning is a good competitive inhibitor of Class II FBP aldolase. In order to improve the binding affinity of this inhibitor for the enzyme activate site, new molecules based upon this compound were designed, synthesized and tested against recombinant Class II FBP aldolases from aforementioned microorganisms using kinetic assays developed by our group. This research is supported by NSERC (J.G.G. and G.I.D.)

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)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicEnzyme Structure and FunctionFrench-language works237,207