Embryonic extracts derived from the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans remove uracil from DNA by the sequential action of uracil-DNA glycosylase and AP (apurinic/apyrimidinic) endonuclease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA bases continuously undergo modifications in response to endogenous reactions such as oxidation, alkylation or deamination. The modified bases are primarily removed by DNA glycosylases, which cleave the N-glycosylic bond linking the base to the sugar, to generate an apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) site, and this latter lesion is highly mutagenic. Previously, no study has demonstrated the processing of these lesions in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Herein, we report the existence of uracil-DNA glycosylase and AP endonuclease activities in extracts derived from embryos of C. elegans. These enzyme activities were monitored using a defined 5'-end (32)P-labelled 42-bp synthetic oligonucleotide substrate bearing a single uracil residue opposite guanine at position 21. The embryonic extract rapidly cleaved the substrate in a time-dependent manner to produce a 20-mer product. The extract did not excise adenine or thymine opposite guanine, although uracil opposite either adenine or thymine was processed. Addition of the highly specific inhibitor of uracil-DNA glycosylase produced by Bacillus subtilis to the extract prevented the formation of the 20-mer product, indicating that removal of uracil is catalysed by uracil-DNA glycosylase. The data suggest that the 20-mer product was generated by a sequential reaction, i.e., removal of the uracil base followed by 5'-cleavage of the AP site. Further analysis revealed that product formation was dependent upon the presence of Mg(2+), suggesting that cleavage of the AP site, following uracil excision, is carried out by a Mg(2+)-dependent AP endonuclease. It would appear that these activities correspond to the first two steps of a putative base-excision-repair pathway in C. elegans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".