Chromatin architecture and functions: the role(s) of poly(ADP-RIBOSE) polymerase and poly(ADPribosyl)ation of nuclear proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epigenetic states that allow chromatin fidelity inheritance can be mediated by several factors. One of them, histone variants and their modifications (including acetylation, methylation, phosphorylation, poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation, and ubiquitylation) create distinct patterns of signals read by other proteins, and are strictly related to chromatin remodelling, which is necessary for the specific expression of a gene, and for DNA repair, recombination, and replication. In the framework of chromatin-controlling factors, the poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation of nuclear proteins, catalysed by poly(ADP-ribose)polymerases (PARPs), has been implicated in the regulation of both physiological and pathological events (gene expression/amplification, cellular division/differentiation, DNA replication, malignant transformation, and apoptotic cell death). The involvement of PARPs in this scenario has raised doubts about the epigenetic value of poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation, because it is generally activated after DNA damage. However, one emerging view suggests that both the product of this reaction, poly(ADP-ribose), and PARPs, particularly PARP 1, play a fundamental role in recruiting protein targets to specific sites and (or) in interacting physically with structural and regulatory factors, through highly reproducible and inheritable mechanisms, often independent of DNA breaks. The interplay of PARPs with protein factors, and the combinatorial effect of poly(ADPribosyl)ation with other post-translational modifications has shed new light on the potential and versatility of this dynamic reaction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".