MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

GENETIC VARIATION AND DNA REPLICATION TIMING, OR WHY IS THERE LATE REPLICATING DNA?

2011· review· en· W2050572148 on OpenAlexaff
John H. Herrick

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMutation rateGeneticsDNA replicationEuchromatinGenomeMutationReplication timingMutation AccumulationOrigin of replicationDNAHeterochromatinGeneChromatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutation rates vary significantly within the genome and across species. Recent studies revealed a long suspected replication-timing effect on mutation rate, but the mechanisms that regulate the increase in mutation rate as the genome is replicated remain unclear. Evidence is emerging, however, that DNA repair systems, in general, are less efficient in late replicating heterochromatic regions compared to early replicating euchromatic regions of the genome. At the same time, mutation rates in both vertebrates and invertebrates have been shown to vary with generation time (GT). GT is correlated with genome size, which suggests a possible nucleotypic effect on species-specific mutation rates. These and other observations all converge on a role for DNA replication checkpoints in modulating generation times and mutation rates during the DNA synthetic phase (S phase) of the cell cycle. The following will examine the potential role of the intra-S checkpoint in regulating cell cycle times (GT) and mutation rates in eukaryotes. This article was published online on August 5, 2011. An error was subsequently identified. This notice is included in the online and print versions to indicate that both have been corrected October 4, 2011.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207