MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Werner syndrome protein prevents DNA breaks upon chromatin structure alteration

2007· article· en· W1994657894 on OpenAlexafffund
Ramachander V.N. Turaga, Laurent Massip, Alejandro Chavez, F. Brad Johnson, Michel Lebel

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Cell · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de Québec
FundersUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute on AgingUniversité LavalWayne State University
KeywordsWerner syndromeBiologyHelicaseChromatinBloom syndromeGenome instabilityNucleoplasmPremature agingRecQ helicaseGeneticsCell biologyDNA repairCTCFDNAMolecular biologyDNA damageNucleolusGeneTranscription factorCytoplasm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Werner syndrome is a rare disorder characterized by genome instability and the premature onset of several pathologies associated with aging. The gene responsible for Werner syndrome codes for a RecQ-type DNA helicase and is believed to be involved in different aspects of DNA repair, replication, and transcription. The human Werner protein (WRN) translocates from nucleoli to the nucleoplasm upon DNA damage. Here, for the first time we show WRN translocation following treatment with chloroquine (CHL) or trichostatin A (TSA), agents that alter chromatin structure without producing DNA breaks. In contrast to normal cells, WRN deficient human and murine cells incurred extensive DNA breaks upon CHL or TSA treatment, indicating a functional role for WRN in the proper response to these agents. Cells deficient for another RecQ-type helicase, Bloom syndrome, were not sensitive to these agents. WRN is known from in vitro studies to bind and stimulate the activity of topoisomerase I (Topol). CHL enhanced the association between WRN and Topol, suggesting that topological stress elicits a requirement for the stimulation of Topol by WRN. Supporting this idea, overexpression of Topol reduced CHL and TSA-induced DNA breaks in WRN null cells. We thus describe a novel function for WRN in ensuring genome stability to act in concert with Topol to prevent DNA breaks, following alterations in chromatin topology.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging CellSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207