MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071487088 · doi:10.1093/nar/28.12.2307

The role of polyamines, Na+ and K+ in the formation of triple helices between purine oligonucleotides and the promoter region of the human c-src proto-oncogene

2000· article· en· W2071487088 on OpenAlexaff
Palok Aich

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPolyamine Metabolism and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Cancer InstituteMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyOligonucleotideNucleasePurinePolyamineBinding siteBiochemistryStereochemistryMolecular biologyBiophysicsDNAChemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Binding constants for triplex formation between purine-rich oligonucleotides and a pyrimidine.purine tract of the human c-src proto-oncogene were measured by fluorescence polarization in the presence of polyamines, Na(+) and K(+). In both the hexamine and tetramine series, the longer polyamines had the larger binding constants for triplex formation at low concentrations of polyamine. At higher concentrations all values tended to plateau in the 10(9)/M range. In contrast to previous reports, K(+) did not inhibit triplex formation and at 150 mM the binding constants were again in the 10(9)/M range for both an 11mer and 22mer oligonucleotide. At 150 mM K(+) the addition of polyamines did not lead to any significant increase in the binding constants. It was determined that the lack of inhibition by K(+) was due to the low concentration (1 nM) of purine oligonucleotide required for the fluorescence polarization technique. At higher concentrations (1 microM) self-association of the oligonucleotide was observed. These results suggest that in vivo, at least for the c-src promoter, the inhibition of triplex formation by K(+) may not be detrimental. However, it may be difficult to achieve binding constants above approximately 10(9)/M even in the presence of polycations.

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)0.001
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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicPolyamine Metabolism and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207