MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106255182 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkh950

Electron transfer in DNA duplexes containing 2-methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone

2004· article· en· W2106255182 on OpenAlexafffund
François Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMoietyDNAMenadioneOligonucleotideBase pairElectron transferBiologyStereochemistryDNA damageNaphthoquinonePhotochemistryBiochemistryChemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2-methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone (menadione, MQ) was linked to synthetic oligonucleotides and exposed to near-UV light to generate base radical cations in DNA. This model system of electron transfer induced alkali-labile breaks at GG doublets, similar to anthraquinone and metallointercalators systems. In sharp contrast to other systems, the photolysis of MQ-DNA duplexes gave interstrand cross-links and alkali-labile breaks at bases on the complementary strand opposite the MQ moiety. For sequences with an internal MQ, the formation of cross-links with A and C opposite the MQ moiety was 2- to 3-fold greater than that with G and T. The yield of cross-links was more than 10-fold greater than that of breaks opposite MQ, which in turn was more than 2-fold greater than breaks at GG doublets. The yield of damage at GG doublets greatly increased for a sequence with a terminal MQ. The distribution of base damage was measured by enzymatic digestion and HPLC analysis (dAdo > dThd > dGuo > dCyd). The formation of novel products in MQ-DNA duplexes was attributed to the ability of excited MQ to generate the radical cations of all four DNA bases; thus, this photochemical reaction provides an ideal model system to study the effects of ionizing radiation and one-electron oxidants.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.324
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations24
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicDNA and Nucleic Acid ChemistryFrench-language works237,207