MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084089214 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m502477200

Identification of Mammalian Proteins Cross-linked to DNA by Ionizing Radiation

2005· article· en· W2084089214 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon Barker, Michael Weinfeld, Jing Zheng, Liang Li, David Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Cancer Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonizing radiationIdentification (biology)DNAComputational biologyBiologyGeneticsPhysicsIrradiationNuclear physicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ionizing radiation (IR) is an important environmental risk factor for various cancers and also a major therapeutic agent for cancer treatment. Exposure of mammalian cells to IR induces several types of damage to DNA, including double- and single-strand breaks, base and sugar damage, as well as DNA-DNA and DNA-protein cross-links (DPCs). Little is known regarding the biological consequences of DPCs. Identifying the proteins that become cross-linked to DNA by IR would be an important first step in this regard. We have therefore undertaken a proteomics study to isolate and identify proteins involved in IR-induced DPCs. DPCs were induced in AA8 Chinese hamster ovary or GM00637 human fibroblast cells using 0-4 gray of gamma-rays under either aerated or hypoxic conditions. DPCs were isolated using a recently developed method, and proteins were identified by mass spectrometry. We identified 29 proteins as being cross-linked to DNA by IR under aerated and/or hypoxic conditions. The identified proteins include structural proteins, actin-associated proteins, transcription regulators, RNA-splicing components, stress-response proteins, cell cycle regulatory proteins, and GDP/GTP-binding proteins. The involvement of several proteins (actin, histone H2B, and others) in DPCs was confirmed by using Western blot analysis. The dose responsiveness of DPC induction was examined by staining one-dimensional SDS-polyacrylamide gels with SYPRO Tangerine followed by analysis using fluorescence imaging. Quantitation of the fluorescence signal indicated no significant difference in total yields of IR-induced DPCs generated under aerated or hypoxic conditions, although differences were observed for several individual protein bands.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations114
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207