Differences in replication of a DNA template containing an ethyl phosphotriester by T4 DNA polymerase and Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A DNA template containing a single ethyl phosphotriester was replicated in vitro by the bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase and by Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I (DNA pol I). Escherichia coli DNA pol I bypassed the lesion efficiently, but partial inhibition was observed for T4 DNA polymerase. The replication block produced by the ethyl phosphotriester was increased at low dNTP concentrations and for a mutant T4 DNA polymerase with an antimutator phenotype, increased proofreading activity, and reduced ability to bind DNA in the polymerase active center. These observations support a model in which an ethyl phosphotriester impedes primer elongation by T4 DNA polymerase by decreasing formation of the ternary DNA polymerase-DNA-dNTP complex. When primer elongation is not possible, proofreading becomes the favored reaction. Apparent futile cycles of nucleotide incorporation and proofreading, the idling reaction, were observed at the site of the lesion. The replication block was overcome by higher dNTP concentrations. Thus, ethyl phosphotriesters may be tolerated in vivo by the up-regulation of dNTP biosynthesis that occurs during the cellular checkpoint response to blocked DNA replication forks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".