Determining the Predominant Conformations of Mortiamides A–D in Solution Using NMR Data and Molecular Modeling Tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Macrocyclic peptidomimetics have been seriously contributing to our arsenal of drugs to combat diseases. The search for nature's discoveries led us to mortiamides A-D (found in a novel fungus from Northern Canada), which is a family of cyclic peptides that clearly have demonstrated impressive pharmaceutical potential. This prompted us to learn more about their solution-state properties as these are central for binding to target molecules. Here, we secured and isolated mortiamide D, and then acquired high-resolution nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) data to learn more about its structure and dynamics attributes. Sets of two-dimensional NMR experiments provided atomic-level (through-bond and through-space) data to confirm the primary structure, and NMR-driven molecular dynamics (MD) simulations suggested that more than one predominant three-dimensional (3D) structure exist in solution. Further steps of MD simulations are consistent with the finding that the backbones of mortiamides A-C also have at least two prominent macrocyclic shapes, but the side-chain structures and dynamics differed significantly. Knowledge of these solution properties can be exploited for drug design and discovery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".