MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020850151 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1112036108

Structural basis for the phosphatase activity of polynucleotide kinase/phosphatase on single- and double-stranded DNA substrates

2011· article· en· W2020850151 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Coquelle, Zahra Havali-Shahriari, Nina Bernstein, Ruth Green, J. N. Mark Glover

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
Canadian institutionsMacEwan UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Cancer InstituteHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsDNAPhosphataseBiochemistryBiologyDNA repairActive siteDNA polymeraseEnzymeCell biologyBiophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polynucleotide kinase/phosphatase (PNKP) is a critical mammalian DNA repair enzyme that generates 5'-phosphate and 3'-hydroxyl groups at damaged DNA termini that are required for subsequent processing by DNA ligases and polymerases. The PNKP phosphatase domain recognizes 3'-phosphate termini within DNA nicks, gaps, or at double- or single-strand breaks. Here we present a mechanistic rationale for the recognition of damaged DNA termini by the PNKP phosphatase domain. The crystal structures of PNKP bound to single-stranded DNA substrates reveals a narrow active site cleft that accommodates a single-stranded substrate in a sequence-independent manner. Biochemical studies suggest that the terminal base pairs of double-stranded substrates near the 3'-phosphate are destabilized by PNKP to allow substrate access to the active site. A positively charged surface distinct from the active site specifically facilitates interactions with double-stranded substrates, providing a complex DNA binding surface that enables the recognition of diverse substrates.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicDNA and Nucleic Acid ChemistryFrench-language works237,207