MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991811356 · doi:10.1107/s1744309108032399

Purification, crystallization and preliminary X-ray diffraction analysis of the Whirly domain of StWhy2 in complex with single-stranded DNA

2008· article· en· W1991811356 on OpenAlexafffund
Laurent Cappadocia, J. Sygusch, Normand Brisson

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section F Structural Biology and Crystallization Communications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBrookhaven National LaboratoryCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of EnergyFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsCrystallographyCrystallizationResolution (logic)DNADiffractionMaterials scienceX-ray crystallographyChemistryOpticsPhysicsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

StWhy1 and StWhy2 are members of the Whirly family of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) binding proteins. To understand the mode of binding of the Whirly proteins to single-stranded DNA, crystals of the Whirly domains of both StWhy1 and StWhy2 in complex with single-stranded DNA were obtained by the hanging-drop vapour-diffusion method. The diffraction patterns of the StWhy1-ssDNA complex crystals displayed severe anisotropy and were of low resolution, making them unsuitable for structure determination. In contrast, the crystals of the StWhy2-ssDNA complex diffracted isotropically to 2.20 A resolution. The crystallization and data collection to 2.20 A resolution of StWhy2 in the free form are also reported.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section F Structural Biology and Crystallization CommunicationsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207