MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lack of SeqA focus formation, specific DNA binding and proper protein multimerization in the <i>Escherichia coli</i> sequestration mutant <i>seqA2</i>

2003· article· en· W1536557591 on OpenAlexaff
Solveig Fossum, Sølvi Søreide, Kirsten Skarstad

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Microbiology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
FundersNorges ForskningsrådKreftforeningen
KeywordsSeqA protein domainBiologyMutantEscherichia coliDNACell biologyNucleoidMutationGeneticsGeneDNA replicationOrigin of replication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Escherichia coli wild-type cells newly formed origins cannot be reinitiated. The prevention of reinitiation is termed sequestration and is dependent on the hemimethylated state of newly replicated DNA. Several mutants discovered in a screen for the inability to sequester hemimethylated origins have been mapped to the seqA gene. Here, one of these mutants, seqA2, harbouring a single amino acid change in the C-terminal end of the SeqA protein, was found to also be unable to form foci in vivo. The SeqA foci seen in the wild-type cells are believed to arise from multimerization of SeqA on hemimethylated DNA at the replication fork, presumably representing organization of newly formed DNA by SeqA. The result suggests that the process of origin sequestration is closely tied to the process of focus maintenance at the replication fork. In vitro, purified SeqA2 protein was found incapable of forming highly ordered multimers that bind hemimethylated oriC. The mutant protein was also incapable of restraining negative supercoils. Both in vivo and in vitro results support the idea that origin sequestration is an integral part of organization of newly formed DNA performed by SeqA.

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular MicrobiologySame topicBacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyFrench-language works237,207