MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963923026 · doi:10.1534/genetics.104.029215

Testing Predictions of the Double-Strand Break Repair Model Relating to Crossing Over in Mammalian Cells

2004· article· en· W1963923026 on OpenAlexafffund
Erin C. Birmingham, Shauna A. Lee, Richard McCulloch, Mark D. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHolliday junctionHomologous recombinationBiologyChromosomal crossoverGeneticsRecombinationDNA repairRAD52Genetic recombinationMeiosisDNAHomologous chromosomeDouble strandGeneComputational biologyRAD51

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In yeast, four-stranded, biparental "joint molecules" containing a pair of Holliday junctions are demonstrated intermediates in the repair of meiotic double-strand breaks (DSBs). Genetic and physical evidence suggests that when joint molecules are resolved by the cutting of each of the two Holliday junctions, crossover products result at least most of the time. The double-strand break repair (DSBR) model is currently accepted as a paradigm for acts of DSB repair that lead to crossing over. In this study, a well-defined mammalian gene-targeting assay was used to test predictions that the DSBR model makes about the frequency and position of hDNA in recombinants generated by crossing over. The DSBR model predicts that hDNA will frequently form on opposite sides of the DSB in the two homologous sequences undergoing recombination [half conversion (HC); 5:3, 5:3 segregation]. By examining the segregation patterns of poorly repairable small palindrome genetic markers, we show that this configuration of hDNA is rare. Instead, in a large number of recombinants, full conversion (FC) events in the direction of the unbroken chromosomal sequence (6:2 segregation) were observed on one side of the DSB. A conspicuous fraction of the unidirectional FC events was associated with normal 4:4 marker segregation on the other side of the DSB. In addition, a large number of recombinants displayed evidence of hDNA formation. In several, hDNA was symmetrical on one side of the DSB, suggesting that the two homologous regions undergoing recombination swapped single strands of the same polarity. These data are considered within the context of modified versions of the DSBR model.

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 score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207