Yields of damage to C4′ deoxyribose and to pyrimidines in pUC18 by the direct effect of ionizing radiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our mechanistic understanding of damage formation in DNA by the direct effect relies heavily on what is known of free radical intermediates studied by EPR spectroscopy. Bridging this information to stable product formation requires methods with comparable sensitivities, a criterion met by the (32)P-post-labeling assay developed by Weinfeld and Soderlind, [Weinfeld,M. and Soderlind,K.-J.M. (1991) (32)P-Postlabeling detection of radiation-induced DNA damage: identification and estimation of thymine glycols and phosphoglycolate termini. Biochemistry, 30, 1091-1097] which when applied to the indirect effect, detected phosphoglycolate (pg) and thymine glycol (Tg). Here we applied this assay to the direct effect, measuring product yields in pUC18 films with hydration levels (Γ) of 2.5, 16 or 23 waters per nucleotide and X-irradiated at either 4 K or room temperature (RT). The yields of pg [G(pg)] for Γ ≈ 2.5 were 2.8 ± 0.2 nmol/J (RT) and 0.2 ± 0.3 nmol/J (4 K), which is evidence that the C4' radical contributes little to the total deoxyribose damage via the direct effect. The yield of detectable base damage [G(B*)] at Γ ≈ 2.5 was found to be 30.2 ± 1.0 nmol/J (RT) and 12.9 ± 0.7 nmol/J (4 K). While the base damage called B*, could be due to either oxidation or reduction, we argue that two reduction products, 5,6-dihydrouracil and 5,6-dihydrothymine, are the most likely candidates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".