Role of Micronucleus-Limited DNA in Programmed Deletion of mse2.9 during Macronuclear Development of <i>Tetrahymena thermophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extensive programmed DNA rearrangements occur during the development of the somatic macronucleus from the germ line micronucleus in the sexual cycle of the ciliated protozoan Tetrahymena thermophila. Using an in vivo processing assay, we analyzed the role of micronucleus-limited DNA during the programmed deletion of mse2.9, an internal eliminated sequence (IES). We identified a 200-bp region within mse2.9 that contains an important cis-acting element which is required for the targeting of efficient programmed deletion. Our results, obtained with a series of mse2.9-based chimeric IESs, led us to suggest that the cis-acting elements in both micronucleus-limited and macronucleus-retained flanking DNAs stimulate programmed deletion to different degrees depending on the particular eliminated sequence. The mse2.9 IES is situated within the second intron of the micronuclear locus of the ARP1 gene. We show that the expression of ARP1 is not essential for the growth of Tetrahymena. Our results also suggest that mse2.9 is not subject to epigenetic regulation of DNA deletion, placing possible constraints on the scan RNA model of IES excision.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".