MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967143677 · doi:10.1107/s1744309109029376

Crystallization and preliminary X-ray diffraction analysis of motif N from<i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>Dbf4

2009· article· en· W1967143677 on OpenAlexafffund
Lindsay A. Matthews, Andrew Duong, Ajai A. Prasad, Bernard P. Duncker, Alba Guarné

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section F Structural Biology and Crystallization Communications · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeBiologyG2-M DNA damage checkpointOrigin recognition complexDNA replicationCell biologyGeneticsComputational biologyCell cycleDNACell cycle checkpointEukaryotic DNA replicationYeastGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cdc7-Dbf4 complex plays an instrumental role in the initiation of DNA replication and is a target of replication-checkpoint responses in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Cdc7 is a conserved serine/threonine kinase whose activity depends on association with its regulatory subunit, Dbf4. A conserved sequence near the N-terminus of Dbf4 (motif N) is necessary for the interaction of Cdc7-Dbf4 with the checkpoint kinase Rad53. To understand the role of the Cdc7-Dbf4 complex in checkpoint responses, a fragment of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Dbf4 encompassing motif N was isolated, overproduced and crystallized. A complete native data set was collected at 100 K from crystals that diffracted X-rays to 2.75 A resolution and structure determination is currently under way.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section F Structural Biology and Crystallization CommunicationsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207