MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020948165 · doi:10.1139/o02-083

Protamine-like proteins: evidence for a novel chromatin structure

2002· review· en· W2020948165 on OpenAlexaffvenue
John D. Lewis, Juan Ausió

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChromatinProtamineHistoneBiologySpermEpigeneticsHistone-modifying enzymesCell biologyDNANucleosomeSomatic cellHistone H1GeneticsBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protamine-like (PL) proteins are DNA-condensing proteins that replace somatic-type histones during spermatogenesis. Their composition suggests a function intermediate to that of histones and protamines. Although these proteins have been well characterized at the chemical level in a large number of species, particularly in marine invertebrates, little is known about the specific structures arising from their interaction with DNA. Speculation concerning chromatin structure is complicated by the high degree of heterogeneity in both the number and size of these proteins, which can vary considerably even between closely related species. After careful examination and comparison of the protein sequences available to date for the PL proteins, we propose a model for a novel chromatin structure in the sperm of these organisms that is mediated by somatic-type histones, which are frequently found associated with these proteins. This structure supports the concept that the PL proteins may represent various evolutionary steps between a sperm-specific histone H1 precursor and true protamines. Potential post-translational modifications and the control of PL protein expression and deposition are also discussed.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.285 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207