Fidelity of Primate Cell Repair of a Double-strand Break within a (CTG)·(CAG) Tract
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At least 15 human diseases are caused by the instability of gene-specific (CTG).(CAG) repeats. The precise mechanism of instability remains unknown, though bacterial and yeast models have suggested a role for aberrant repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs). Using an established primate DSB repair system, we have investigated the fidelity of repair of a DSB within a (CTG).(CAG) repeat tract. DSB repair substrates were generated from plasmids that are stably replicated in their circular form, permitting us to highlight the effects of DSB repair on repeat stability and minimize the contribution of replication. DSBs were introduced into repeat-containing plasmids using a unique BsmI site, such that the entire repeat tract comprised one free end of the linearized plasmid. Substrates containing 17, 47, and 79 repeats, in either their linear duplex form or containing slipped structures (out-of-register interstrand mispairings at repeat sequences), were transiently transfected into primate cells. Linearized plasmids with repeats were repaired with mildly reduced efficiency, while the presence of slipped structures considerably reduced repair efficiency. The repaired products were characterized for alterations within the repeat tract and flanking sequence. DSB repair induced predominantly repeat deletions. Notably, a polarized/directional deletion effect was observed, in that the repetitive end of the DSB was preferentially removed. This phenomenon was dramatically enhanced when slipped structures were present within the repeat tract, providing the first evidence for error-prone processing of slipped-strand structures. These results suggest the existence of primate nuclease activities that are specific for (CTG).(CAG) repeats and the structures they form.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".