Learning Structure Activity Relationship (SAR) of the Wittig Reaction from Genetically-Encoded Substrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Wittig reaction can be used for late stage functionalization of proteins and peptides to ligate glycans, pharmacophores, and many other functionalities. In this manuscript, we modified 160,000 N-terminal glyoxaldehyde peptides displayed on phage with the Wittig reaction by biotin labeled ylide under conditions that functionalize only 1% of the library population. Deep-sequencing of the biotinylated and input populations estimated the rate of conversion for each sequence. This “deep conversion” (DC) from deep sequencing correlates with rate constants measured by HPLC. Peptide sequences with fast and slow reactivity highlighted a critical role of primary backbone amides (N-H) in accelerating the rate of the aqueous Wittig reaction. Experimental measurement of reaction rates and density functional theory (DFT) computation of the transition state geometries corroborated this relationship. We also collected deep-sequencing data to build structure activity relationship (SAR) models that can predict DC value of the Wittig reaction. By using this data, we trained two classifier models based on Gradient Boosted trees. These classifiers achieved area under the ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) Curve (ROC AUC) of 81.2 ± 0.4 and 73.7 ± 0.8 (90–92% accuracy) in determining whether a sequence belonged to the top 5% or the bottom 5% in terms of its reactivity. We have deployed our learned models as a publicly available web app: http://44.226.164.95/ We anticipate that phage-displayed peptides and related mRNA or DNA-displayed substrates can be employed in a similar fashion to study the substrate scope and mechanisms of many other chemical reactions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".