O4-Alkyl-2′-deoxythymidine cross-linked DNA to probe recognition and repair by O6-alkylguanine DNA alkyltransferases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA duplexes containing a directly opposed O(4)-2'-deoxythymidine-alkyl-O(4)-2'-deoxythymidine (O(4)-dT-alkyl-O(4)-dT) interstrand cross-link (ICL) have been prepared by the synthesis of cross-linked nucleoside dimers which were converted to phosphoramidites to produce site specific ICL. ICL duplexes containing alkyl chains of four and seven methylene groups were prepared and characterized by mass spectrometry and nuclease digests. Thermal denaturation experiments revealed four and seven methylene containing ICL increased the T(m) of the duplex with respect to the non-cross-linked control with an observed decrease in enthalpy based on thermodynamic analysis of the denaturation curves. Circular dichroism experiments on the ICL duplexes indicated minimal difference from B-form DNA structure. These ICL were used for DNA repair studies with O(6)-alkylguanine DNA alkyltransferase (AGT) proteins from human (hAGT) and E. coli (Ada-C and OGT), whose purpose is to remove O(6)-alkylguanine and in some cases O(4)-alkylthymine lesions. It has been previously shown that hAGT can repair O(6)-2'-deoxyguanosine-alkyl-O(6)-2'-deoxyguanosine ICL. The O(4)-dT-alkyl-O(4)-dT ICL prepared in this study were found to evade repair by hAGT, OGT and Ada-C. Electromobility shift assay (EMSA) results indicated that the absence of any repair by hAGT was not a result of binding. OGT was the only AGT to show activity in the repair of oligonucleotides containing the mono-adducts O(4)-butyl-4-ol-2'-deoxythymidine and O(4)-heptyl-7-ol-2'-deoxythymidine. Binding experiments conducted with hAGT demonstrated that the protein bound O(4)-alkylthymine lesions with similar affinities to O(6)-methylguanine, which hAGT repairs efficiently, suggesting the lack of O(4)-alkylthymine repair by hAGT is not a function of recognition.
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".