MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380730525 · doi:10.1021/acsmacrolett.3c00223

Stabilizing α-Helicity of a Polypeptide in Aqueous Urea: Dipole Orientation or Hydrogen Bonding?

2023· article· en· W4380730525 on OpenAlexafffund
Luis A. Baptista, Yani Zhao, Kurt Kremer, Debashish Mukherji, Robinson Cortes–Huerto

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Macro Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEnzyme Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFP7 Ideas: European Research CouncilCanada First Research Excellence FundDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsHydrogen bondUreaAqueous solutionDipoleHelicityOrientation (vector space)Materials scienceCrystallographyHydrogenChemical physicsChemical engineeringChemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryPhysicsMoleculeGeometryMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a mechanism for α-helix folding of polyalanine in aqueous urea that reconciles experimental and simulation studies. Over 15 μs long, all-atom simulations reveal that, upon dehydrating the protein's first solvation shell, a delicate balance between localized urea-residue dipole interactions and hydrogen bonds dictates polypeptide solvation properties and structure. Our work clarifies the experimentally observed tendency of these alanine-rich systems to form secondary structures at low and intermediate urea concentrations. Moreover, it is consistent with the commonly accepted hydrogen-bond-induced helix unfolding, dominant at high urea concentrations. These results establish a structure-property relationship highlighting the importance of microscopic dipole-dipole orientations/interactions for the operational understanding of macroscopic protein solvation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Macro LettersSame topicEnzyme Structure and FunctionFrench-language works237,207