MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080617520 · doi:10.1139/o05-115

Chromatin remodeling complexes: ATP-dependent machines in action

2005· review· en· W2080617520 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cotteka N. Johnson, Nicholas L. Adkins, Philippe Georgel

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsChromatin remodelingChromatinNucleosomeATP hydrolysisHistoneChromatin structure remodeling (RSC) complexCell biologyBiologyDNASWI/SNFHistone-modifying enzymesFunction (biology)BiochemistryChemistryEnzymeATPase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the initial characterization of chromatin remodeling as an ATP-dependent process, many studies have given us insight into how nucleosome-remodeling complexes can affect various nuclear functions. However, the multistep DNA-histone remodeling process has not been completely elucidated. Although new studies are published on a nearly weekly basis, the nature and roles of interactions of the individual SWI/SNF- and ISWI-based remodeling complexes and DNA, core histones, and other chromatin-associated proteins are not fully understood. In addition, the potential changes associated with ATP recruitment and its subsequent hydrolysis have not been fully characterized. This review explores possible mechanisms by which chromatin-remodeling complexes are recruited to specific loci, use ATP hydrolysis to achieve actual remodeling through disruption of DNA-histone interactions, and are released from their chromatin template. We propose possible roles for ATP hydrolysis in a chromatin-release/target-scanning process that offer an alternative to or complement the often overlooked function of delivering the energy required for sliding or dislodging specific subsets of core histones.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.273 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations81
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207