MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027760269 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkl426

A LexA-related protein regulates redox-sensitive expression of the cyanobacterial RNA helicase, crhR

2006· article· en· W2027760269 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Patterson-Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPhotosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRepressor lexABiologyGene expressionRNA Helicase AMolecular biologyElectrophoretic mobility shift assayGeneRepressorSynechocystisDNABiochemistryRNAHelicase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expression of the cyanobacterial DEAD-box RNA helicase, crhR, is regulated in response to conditions, which elicit reduction of the photosynthetic electron transport chain. A combination of electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA), DNA affinity chromatography and mass spectrometry identified that a LexA-related protein binds specifically to the crhR gene. Transcript analysis indicates that lexA and crhR are divergently expressed, with lexA and crhR transcripts accumulating differentially under conditions, which respectively oxidize and reduce the electron transport chain. In addition, expression of the Synechocystis lexA gene is not DNA damage inducible and its amino acid sequence lacks two of three residues required for activity of prototypical LexA proteins, which repress expression of DNA repair genes in a range of prokaryotes. A direct effect of recombinant LexA protein on crhR expression was confirmed from the observation that LexA reduces crhR expression in a linear manner in an in vitro transcription/translation assay. The results indicate that the Synechocystis LexA-related protein functions as a regulator of redox-responsive crhR gene expression, and not DNA damage repair genes.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations47
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicPhotosynthetic Processes and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207