MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200293462 · doi:10.1002/cbic.202100600

Selection of M<sup>2+</sup>‐Independent RNA‐Cleaving DNAzymes with Side‐Chains Mimicking Arginine and Lysine

2021· article· en· W4200293462 on OpenAlexafffund
S. Paul, Antonio A. W. L. Wong, Leo T. Liu, David M. Perrin

Bibliographic record

VenueChemBioChem · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDeoxyribozymeStereochemistryRibozymeNucleobaseImidazoleChemistryCombinatorial chemistryNucleotideCleaveCleavage (geology)NucleosideRNANucleic acidDNAGuanidineOligonucleotideBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sequence‐specific cleavage of RNA by nucleic acid catalysts in the absence of a divalent metal cation (M 2+ ) has remained an important goal in biomimicry with potential therapeutic applications. Given the lack of functional group diversity in canonical nucleotides, modified nucleotides with amino acid‐like side chains were used to enhance self‐cleavage rates at a single embedded ribonucleoside site. Previous works relied on three functional groups: an amine, a guanidine and an imidazole ensconced on three different nucleosides. However, to date, few studies have systematically addressed the necessity of all three modifications, as the value of any single modified nucleoside is contextualized at the outset of selection. Herein, we report on the use of only two modified dNTPs, excluding an imidazole, i. e. 5‐(3‐guanidinoallyl)‐2’‐dUTP (dU ga TP) and 5‐aminoallyl‐2′‐dCTP (dC aa TP), to select in‐vitro self‐cleaving DNAzymes that cleave in the absence of M 2+ in a pH‐independent fashion. Cleavage shows biphasic kinetics with rate constants that are significantly higher than in unmodified DNAzymes and compare favorably to certain DNAzymes involving an imidazole.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemBioChemSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207