Use of 2-Aminopurine Fluorescence To Study the Role of the β Hairpin in the Proofreading Pathway Catalyzed by the Phage T4 and RB69 DNA Polymerases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For DNA polymerases to proofread a misincorporated nucleotide, the terminal 3-4 nucleotides of the primer strand must be separated from the template strand before being bound in the exonuclease active center. Genetic and biochemical studies of the bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase revealed that a prominent beta-hairpin structure in the exonuclease domain is needed to efficiently form the strand-separated exonuclease complexes. We present here further mutational analysis of the loop region of the T4 DNA polymerase beta-hairpin structure, which provides additional evidence that residues in the loop, namely, Y254 and G255, are important for DNA replication fidelity. The mechanism of strand separation was probed in in vitro reactions using the fluorescence of the base analogue 2-aminopurine (2AP) and mutant RB69 DNA polymerases that have modifications to the beta hairpin, to the exonuclease active site, or to both. We propose from these studies that the beta hairpin in the exonuclease domain of the T4 and RB69 DNA polymerases functions to facilitate strand separation, but residues in the exonuclease active center are required to capture the 3' end of the primer strand following strand separation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".