MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056898744 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m109.058719

Dual Modes of Interaction between XRCC4 and Polynucleotide Kinase/Phosphatase

2010· article· en· W2056898744 on OpenAlexafffund
Rajam S. Mani, Yaping Yu, Shujuan Fang, Meiling Lü, Mesfin Fanta, Angela E. Zolner, Nasser Tahbaz, Dale A. Ramsden, David W. Litchfield, Susan P. Lees‐Miller, Michael Weinfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of TorontoFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsDNA repair protein XRCC4DNA ligaseNon-homologous end joiningPhosphorylationBiologyDNA repairSerine hydroxymethyltransferaseBiochemistryCell biologyDNADNA mismatch repairSerine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

XRCC4 plays a crucial role in the nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway of DNA double-strand break repair acting as a scaffold protein that recruits other NHEJ proteins to double-strand breaks. Phosphorylation of XRCC4 by protein kinase CK2 promotes a high affinity interaction with the forkhead-associated domain of the end-processing enzyme polynucleotide kinase/phosphatase (PNKP). Here we reveal that unphosphorylated XRCC4 also interacts with PNKP through a lower affinity interaction site within the catalytic domain and that this interaction stimulates the turnover of PNKP. Unexpectedly, CK2-phosphorylated XRCC4 inhibited PNKP activity. Moreover, the XRCC4·DNA ligase IV complex also stimulated PNKP enzyme turnover, and this effect was independent of the phosphorylation of XRCC4 at threonine 233. Our results reveal that CK2-mediated phosphorylation of XRCC4 can have different effects on PNKP activity, with implications for the roles of XRCC4 and PNKP in NHEJ.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations63
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207