MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048829658 · doi:10.1128/mcb.00255-12

RMI1 Promotes DNA Replication Fork Progression and Recovery from Replication Fork Stress

2012· article· en· W2048829658 on OpenAlexafffund
Jay Yang, Lara O’Donnell, Daniel Durocher, Grant W. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular and Cellular Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Bureau of Land Management
KeywordsBiologyDNA replicationDNA damageSister chromatid exchangeCell biologyGenome instabilityGeneticsReplication factor CEstablishment of sister chromatid cohesionDNASister chromatidsControl of chromosome duplicationGeneChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RMI1 is a member of an evolutionarily conserved complex composed of BLM and topoisomerase IIIα (TopoIIIα). This complex exhibits strand passage activity in vitro, which is likely important for DNA repair and DNA replication in vivo. The inactivation of RMI1 causes genome instability, including elevated levels of sister chromatid exchange and accelerated tumorigenesis. Using molecular combing to analyze DNA replication at the single-molecule level, we show that RMI1 is required to promote normal replication fork progression. The fork progression defect in RMI1-depleted cells is alleviated in cells lacking BLM, indicating that RMI1 functions downstream of BLM in promoting replication elongation. RMI1 localizes to subnuclear foci with BLM and TopoIIIα in response to replication stress. The proper localization of the complex requires a BLM-TopoIIIα-RMI1 interaction and is essential for RMI1 to promote recovery from replication stress. These findings reveal direct roles of RMI1 in DNA replication and the replication stress response, which could explain the molecular basis for its involvement in suppressing sister chromatid exchange and tumorigenesis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular and Cellular BiologySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207