MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404020702 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2024-87hn7

Enantioselectivity in Metabolism and Toxicity of 6PPD-Quinone in Salmonids

2024· preprint· en· W4404020702 on OpenAlexaff
Rui Li, Holly Barrett, Pranav Nair, Minghua Wang, Lin-Na Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicATP Synthase and ATPases Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToxicityMetabolismQuinoneChemistryEnvironmental chemistryBiochemistryPharmacologyBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The toxicity of N-(1,3-dimethylbutyl)-N'-phenyl-p-phenylenediamine quinone (6PPD-Q) in salmonids has been found to be sensitive to even minor structural changes on its alkyl side chain. Inspired by this, we herein isolated the enantiomers of 6PPD-Q and tested their in vitro metabolism in liver S9 of rainbow trout (O. mykiss), along with their toxicity in a coho salmon (O. kisutch) embryo (CSE-119) cell line. (R)-6PPD-Q was found to be rapidly metabolized in rainbow trout liver S9 with a half-life (t1/2) of 12.3 minutes, which was 2.92 times faster than that of (S)-6PPD-Q. This was further evidenced by the preferential formation of an (R)-aryl-OH-6PPD-Q metabolite. Supporting this, enantioselective accumulation of (S)-6PPD-Q was found in rainbow trout in vivo. To further distinguish between kinetics and intrinsic toxicity, we tested the toxicity of 6PPD-Q enantiomers in the CSE-119 cell line with minimal metabolism of 6PPD-Q. (R)-6PPD-Q was found to strongly induce cytotoxicity in CSE-119 cells with an IC50 of 17.7 µg/L, which was 3.94 times stronger than that of (S)-6PPD-Q. In summary, this study reported the enantioselectivity in both the toxicity and metabolism of 6PPD-Q, demonstrating that its toxicity should be mediated by specific protein binding.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicATP Synthase and ATPases ResearchFrench-language works237,207