Cell surface profiling of cultured cells by direct hydrazide capture of oxidized glycoproteins
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glycoproteins are a particularly interesting subset of the cellular proteome as a high proportion of proteins present on the extracellular cell surface are glycosylated. These cell surface proteins are ideal targets for biologic drug therapies or for diagnostics tests. Here, we describe a modification of the well-described Cell Surface Capture (CSC) method for the selective isolation and identification of cell surface glycoproteins that contain N-linked carbohydrates. This modification, which we refer to as Direct Cell Surface Capture (D-CSC), is based on oxidation of cell surface glycans on intact cells, followed by direct conjugation of the oxidized oligosaccharides to a solid support using hydrazide chemistry, with no biotinylation step. As a proof-of-principle, we applied D-CSC to the analysis of cell surface membrane proteins of three adherent cancer cell lines (A549, OVCAR3, and U87MG) and compared our results to those published using the well-established Cell Surface Capture (CSC) method, demonstrating comparable selectivity for cell surface proteins. •A method enabling the identification of cell surface proteins from cells in culture is described.•Application of this method to profile the cell surface on three different cancer cell lines is included.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it