MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382940245 · doi:10.1002/fbe2.12054

An in silico analysis of the effect of stressors on Mung bean protein

2023· article· en· W4382940245 on OpenAlexafffund
Saipriya Ramalingam, Winny Routray, Jamshid Rahimi, Benjamin Kroetsch, Ashutosh Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Bioengineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProteins in Food Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRadius of gyrationMung beanMolecular dynamicsIn silicoCrystallographyChemistryChemical physicsMaterials scienceBiophysicsFood scienceComputational chemistryBiochemistryBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With the world turning its attention towards sustainable protein sources, mung bean, in recent times has garnered significant research acclaim. As an emerging functional food that is rich in protein, little is known about its characteristics during processing. Hence, in this study, an molecular dynamic (MD) simulation approach was performed on 2CV6, the crystal structure of 8Sα globulin. GROMACS software was used to vary input thermal and pressure parameters (i.e., 300, 373, and 398 K at 3, 5, and 7 Kbar). Visual MD interface was used to picture the changes occurring in the protein's secondary structure as an effect of applied stress. The radius of gyration values decreased significantly with increasing pressure while high‐pressure high‐temperature treatment improved packing effects. STRIDE analysis showed that peripheral 2° structures such as α‐helices and β‐sheets underwent conformational changes to form turns and coils, indicating increased randomness. Despite subjecting the protein molecule to high temperature, the pressure applied counteracted the unwinding process, resulting in overall compaction.

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 score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood BioengineeringSame topicProteins in Food SystemsFrench-language works237,207