Side-by-Side Comparison of DNA Damage Induced by Low-Energy Electrons and High-Energy Photons with Solid TpTpT Trinucleotide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genotoxic effects of high-energy ionizing radiation have been largely attributed to the ionization of H2O leading to hydroxyl radicals and the ionization of DNA leading mostly to damage through base radical cations. However, the contribution of low-energy electrons (LEEs; ≤ 10 eV), which involves subionization events, has been considered to be less important than that of hydroxyl radicals and base radical cations. Here, we compare the ability of LEEs and high-energy X-ray photons to induce DNA damage using dried thin films of TpTpT trinucleotide as a simple and representative model for DNA damage. The main radiation-induced damage of TpTpT as measured by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with UV detection and HPLC coupled to tandem mass spectrometry analyses included thymine release (-Thy), strand breaks (pT, Tp, pTpT, TpTp, and TpT), and the formation of base modifications [5,6-dihydrothymine (5,6-dhT), 5-hydroxymethyluracil (5-hmU), and 5-formyluracil (5-fU)]. The global profile of products was very similar for both types of radiation indicating converging pathways of formation. The percent damage of thymine release, fragmentation, and base modification was 20, 19, and 61 for high-energy X-rays, respectively, compared to 35, 13, and 51 for LEEs (10 eV). Base release was significantly lower for X-rays. In both cases, phosphodiester bond cleavage gave mononucleotides (pT and Tp) and dinucleotides (pTpT and TpTp) containing a terminal phosphate as the major fragments. For base modifications, the ratio of reductive (5,6-dhT) to oxidative products (5-hmU plus 5-fU) was 0.9 for high-energy X-rays compared to 1.7 for LEEs. These results indicate that LEEs give a similar profile of products compared to ionizing radiation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".