MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911614530 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkv701

Adenine versus guanine DNA adducts of aristolochic acids: role of the carcinogen–purine linkage in the differential global genomic repair propensity

2015· article· en· W1911614530 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNephrotoxicity and Medicinal Plants
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsBiologyGuaninePurineDNAGeneticsPurine metabolismCarcinogengenomic DNALinkage (software)DNA repairAdductBiochemistryAristolochic acidGeneEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational modeling is employed to provide a plausible structural explanation for the experimentally-observed differential global genome repair (GGR) propensity of the ALII-N(2)-dG and ALII-N(6)-dA DNA adducts of aristolochic acid II. Our modeling studies suggest that an intrinsic twist at the carcinogen-purine linkage of ALII-N(2)-dG induces lesion site structural perturbations and conformational heterogeneity of damaged DNA. These structural characteristics correlate with the relative repair propensities of AA-adducts, where GGR recognition occurs for ALII-N(2)-dG, but is evaded for intrinsically planar ALII-N(6)-dA that minimally distorts DNA and restricts the conformational flexibility of the damaged duplex. The present analysis on the ALII adduct model systems will inspire future experimental studies on these adducts, and thereby may extend the list of structural factors that directly correlate with the propensity for GGR recognition.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.248 · 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