Structural And Functional Analysis Of Acetylcholinesterase Complexes With “In Situ Click‐Chemistry” Inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ligand binding sites on acetylcholinesterase (AChE) comprise the active center, buried at the base of a deep and narrow gorge lined by aromatic residues, and the peripheral anionic site, located at the gorge entry. These features propelled AChE as an initial reaction vessel suited for in situ click‐chemistry synthesis of high‐affinity syn ‐TZ2PA6 and TZ2PA5 inhibitors, forming a central syn ‐triazole upon cycloaddition within the gorge from alkyne and azide reactants bound to the active site and peripheral site, respectively [1,2]. Subsequent crystallographic analyses of mouse AChE or its Tyr337Ala mutant in complexes with the syn‐ and anti ‐TZ2PA6 regioisomers demonstrated that association of the syn product is accompanied by distinctive side chain positions, freezing‐in‐frame a conformation distinct from an unbound state or an anti complex [3,4]. To correlate the inhibitor dimensions with reactivity and explore whether cycloaddition can occur in a crystalline template, we developed crystal‐soaking procedures and solved structures of AChE complexes with the two TZ2PA5 regioisomers and their TZ2 and PA5 precursors [5]. These new structures, complementary to those of the preformed TZ2PP6 complexes, point to yet undescribed motions in the active site and at the gorge mouth associated with TZ2 binding and reveal coordinated side chain motions that guide the enzyme toward a state favoring syn ‐triazole formation. We will present the rationale of the work, describe those molecular determinants that dictate, in a rate‐limiting step, proper alignment of the azide and alkyne reactants to form the triazole product within the gorge, and compare our data with those from other in situ click chemistry studies. Support or Funding Information Supported by grants RO‐1‐GM18360‐41 and UO1‐NS 058046 (to PT) and by CNRS grants “Action CNRS/USA” and “PICS” (to PM and YB)
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".