Ordered Conformational Changes in Damaged DNA Induced by Nucleotide Excision Repair Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to genotoxic attacks, cells activate sophisticated DNA repair pathways such as nucleotide excision repair (NER), which consists of damage removal via dual incision and DNA resynthesis. Using permanganate footprinting as well as highly purified factors, we show that NER is a dynamic process that takes place in a number of successive steps during which the DNA is remodeled around the lesion in response to the various NER factors. XPC/HR23B first recognizes the damaged structure and initiates the opening of the helix from position -3 to +6. TFIIH is then recruited and, in the presence of ATP, extends the opening from position -6 to +6; it also displaces XPC downstream from the lesion, thereby providing the topological structure for recruiting XPA and RPA, which will enlarge the opening. Once targeted by XPG, the damaged DNA is further melted from position -19 to +8. XPG and XPF/ERCC1 endonucleases then cut the damaged DNA at the limit of the opened structure that was previously "labeled" by the positioning of XPC/HR23B and TFIIH.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".