<i>In situ</i> analysis of repair processes for oxidative DNA damage in mammalian cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxidative DNA damage causes blocks and errors in transcription and replication, leading to cell death and genomic instability. Although repair mechanisms of the damage have been extensively analyzed in vitro, the actual in vivo repair processes remain largely unknown. Here, by irradiation with an UVA laser through a microscope lens, we have conditionally produced single-strand breaks and oxidative base damage at restricted nuclear regions of mammalian cells. We showed, in real time after irradiation by using antibodies and GFP-tagged proteins, rapid and ordered DNA repair processes of oxidative DNA damage in human cells. Furthermore, we characterized repair pathways by using repair-defective mammalian cells and found that DNA polymerase beta accumulated at single-strand breaks and oxidative base damage by means of its 31- and 8-kDa domains, respectively, and that XRCC1 is essential for both polymerase beta-dependent and proliferating cell nuclear antigen-dependent repair pathways of single-strand breaks. Thus, the repair of oxidative DNA damage is based on temporal and functional interactions among various proteins operating at the site of DNA damage in living cells.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".