MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012063835 · doi:10.1021/bi020120e

Nucleoplasmin Interaction with Protamines. Involvement of the Polyglutamic Tract

2002· article· en· W2012063835 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cèlia Prieto, Núria Saperas, Carme Arnan, Melissa Hills, Xiaoying Wang, Manel Chiva, Rosa Aligué, Juan A. Subirana, Juan Ausió

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuskal Herriko UnibertsitateaUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsProtaminePolyglutamic acidChemistryPentamerSpermBiophysicsChromatinRecombinant DNACrystallographyDNABiochemistryBiologyGeneticsGeneHeparin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different recombinant forms of nucleoplasmin including truncations at the carboxyl-terminal end of the molecule (r-NP121, r-NP142) have been expressed and purified. All of them were found to oligomerize, forming pentameric complexes which, according to their hydrodynamic properties, can be modeled by oblate ellipsoids of constant width. In this model, the highly charged carboxyl ends appear to be arranged around a pentameric core along the plane defined by the major axes of the ellipsoid. Importantly, all the recombinant forms appear to be able to decondense protamine-containing sperm nuclei. However, although the stoichiometry with which protamines bind to these forms appears to be constant (2.5 mol of protamine/mol of nucleoplasmin pentamer), the efficiency with which they remove protamines from the sperm DNA decreases in the following order: o-NP > r-NP142 > or = r-NP >> r-NP121. Therefore, the main polyglutamic tract of nucleoplasmin (which is absent in r-NP121), while enhancing the efficiency of protamine removal, is not indispensable for sperm chromatin decondensation in the biological model we have used.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations27
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistrySame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207