MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122791003 · doi:10.1038/ncomms6820

Slow unloading leads to DNA-bound β2-sliding clamp accumulation in live Escherichia coli cells

2014· article· en· W2122791003 on OpenAlexaff
M. Charl Moolman, Sriram Tiruvadi Krishnan, Jacob Kerssemakers, Aafke A. van den Berg, Pawel Tulinski, Martin Depken, Rodrigo Reyes‐Lamothe, David J. Sherratt, Nynke H. Dekker

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekTechnische Universiteit DelftWellcome Trust
KeywordsProcessivityDNA clampDNA replicationBiophysicsCell biologyClampFluorescence microscopeBiologyDNADNA polymerasePolymeraseHomologous recombinationEscherichia coliChemistryFluorescenceBiochemistryGenePolymerase chain reactionReverse transcriptase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ubiquitous sliding clamp facilitates processivity of the replicative polymerase and acts as a platform to recruit proteins involved in replication, recombination and repair. While the dynamics of the E. coli β2-sliding clamp have been characterized in vitro, its in vivo stoichiometry and dynamics remain unclear. To probe both β2-clamp dynamics and stoichiometry in live E. coli cells, we use custom-built microfluidics in combination with single-molecule fluorescence microscopy and photoactivated fluorescence microscopy. We quantify the recruitment, binding and turnover of β2-sliding clamps on DNA during replication. These quantitative in vivo results demonstrate that numerous β2-clamps in E. coli remain on the DNA behind the replication fork for a protracted period of time, allowing them to form a docking platform for other enzymes involved in DNA metabolism.

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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations80
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207