MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1793553422 · doi:10.1002/bies.201500084

Recombinational DNA repair is regulated by compartmentalization of DNA lesions at the nuclear pore complex

2015· review· en· W1793553422 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vincent Géli, Michael Lisby

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Cancer ResearchLigue Contre le Cancer
KeywordsDNA repairBiologyGenome instabilityDNATelomereCell biologyDNA mismatch repairReplication protein ADNA replicationGeneticsDNA damageDNA-binding proteinGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nuclear pore complex (NPC) is emerging as a center for recruitment of a class of "difficult to repair" lesions such as double-strand breaks without a repair template and eroded telomeres in telomerase-deficient cells. In addition to such pathological situations, a recent study by Su and colleagues shows that also physiological threats to genome integrity such as DNA secondary structure-forming triplet repeat sequences relocalize to the NPC during DNA replication. Mutants that fail to reposition the triplet repeat locus to the NPC cause repeat instability. Here, we review the types of DNA lesions that relocalize to the NPC, the putative mechanisms of relocalization, and the types of recombinational repair that are stimulated by the NPC, and present a model for NPC-facilitated repair.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207