MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396650172 · doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2024.102456

Recent advances in photoaffinity labeling strategies to capture Glycan–Protein interactions

2024· article· en· W4396650172 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan L. Babulic, Fabiola V. De León González, Chantelle J. Capicciotti

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Chemical Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Glycomics NetworkSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationBanting Research Foundation
KeywordsGlycanPhotoaffinity labelingChemistryComputational biologyBiochemistryCombinatorial chemistryBiologyBinding siteGlycoprotein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glycans decorate all cells and are critical mediators of cellular processes through recognition by glycan-binding proteins (GBPs). While targeting glycan-protein interactions has great therapeutic potential, these interactions are challenging to study as they are generally transient and exhibit low binding affinities. Glycan-based photo-crosslinkable probes have enabled covalent capture and identification of unknown GBP receptors and glycoconjugate ligands. Here, we review recent progress in photo-crosslinking approaches targeting glycan-mediated interactions. We discuss two prominent emerging strategies: 1) development of photo-crosslinkable oligosaccharide ligands to identify GBP receptors; and 2) cell-surface glyco-engineering to identify glycoconjugate ligands of GBPs. Overall, photoaffinity labeling affords valuable insights into complex glycan-protein networks and is poised to help elucidate the glycan-protein interactome, providing novel targets for therapeutic intervention.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Chemical BiologySame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207