MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133711076 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0806908106

Structure of the human RECQ1 helicase reveals a putative strand-separation pin

2009· article· en· W2133711076 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A.C.W. Pike, Binesh Shrestha, Venkateswarlu Popuri, N. Burgess-Brown, Laura Muzzolini, Silvia Costantini, Alessandro Vindigni, O. Gileadi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseConsiglio Nazionale delle RicercheKarolinska InstitutetAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroStiftelsen för Strategisk ForskningOntario Genomics InstituteOntario GenomicsGenome CanadaOntario Innovation TrustWellcome TrustGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsHelicaseHolliday junctionBiologyDNARecQ helicaseGeneticsDNA repairBiophysicsGeneRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RecQ-like helicases, which include 5 members in the human genome, are important in maintaining genome integrity. We present a crystal structure of a truncated form of the human RECQ1 protein with Mg-ADP. The truncated protein is active in DNA fork unwinding but lacks other activities of the full-length enzyme: disruption of Holliday junctions and DNA strand annealing. The structure of human RECQ1 resembles that of Escherichia coli RecQ, with some important differences. All structural domains are conserved, including the 2 RecA-like domains and the RecQ-specific zinc-binding and winged-helix (WH) domains. However, the WH domain is positioned at a different orientation from that of the E. coli enzyme. We identify a prominent beta-hairpin of the WH domain as essential for DNA strand separation, which may be analogous to DNA strand-separation features of other DNA helicases. This hairpin is significantly shorter in the E. coli enzyme and is not required for its helicase activity, suggesting that there are significant differences between the modes of action of RecQ family members.

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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations115
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207