Assessment of PARP-3 Distribution in Tissues of Cynomolgous Monkeys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 3 (PARP-3) is a newly characterized PARP. In contrast to the two best-studied nuclear PARPs, PARP-1 and PARP-2, PARP-3 activity is apparently not stimulated by DNA damage. However, our previous work has demonstrated that PARP-3 interacts with several DNA damage response proteins, including Ku70/Ku80, DNA-PK, and PARP-1, suggesting that it contributes to the DNA damage response. Furthermore, a possible function for PARP-3 in the regulation of gene expression has been inferred from our observations that it associates with polycomb group proteins, which are responsible for epigenetic modifications leading to gene silencing. In this report, we extend our characterization of PARP-3 by revealing its distribution in the tissues and cell types of adult cynomolgous monkeys using a well-characterized PARP-3 polyclonal antibody. This study is the first to demonstrate that PARP-3 is genuinely expressed in most of the examined tissues. However, its expression is highly restricted to specific cell types of each tissue, indicating that PARP-3 expression is tightly regulated. One of the key findings of this study is that PARP-3 is highly expressed in the nuclei of epithelial cells forming the ducts of prostate, salivary glands, liver, and pancreas and in the neurons of terminal ganglia.
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 | 0.001 | 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".