XRCC4 and XLF form long helical protein filaments suitable for DNA end protection and alignment to facilitate DNA double strand break repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA double strand breaks (DSBs), induced by ionizing radiation (IR) and endogenous stress including replication failure, are the most cytotoxic form of DNA damage. In human cells, most IR-induced DSBs are repaired by the nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway. One of the most critical steps in NHEJ is ligation of DNA ends by DNA ligase IV (LIG4), which interacts with, and is stabilized by, the scaffolding protein X-ray cross-complementing gene 4 (XRCC4). XRCC4 also interacts with XRCC4-like factor (XLF, also called Cernunnos); yet, XLF has been one of the least mechanistically understood proteins and precisely how XLF functions in NHEJ has been enigmatic. Here, we examine current combined structural and mutational findings that uncover integrated functions of XRCC4 and XLF and reveal their interactions to form long, helical protein filaments suitable to protect and align DSB ends. XLF-XRCC4 provides a global structural scaffold for ligating DSBs without requiring long DNA ends, thus ensuring accurate and efficient ligation and repair. The assembly of these XRCC4-XLF filaments, providing both DNA end protection and alignment, may commit cells to NHEJ with general biological implications for NHEJ and DSB repair processes and their links to cancer predispositions and interventions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".