MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156280855 · doi:10.1093/nar/29.2.e5

Inducible expression of exogenous genes in Dictyostelium discoideum using the ribonucleotide reductase promoter

2001· article· en· W2156280855 on OpenAlexafffund
Pascale Gaudet

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsDictyostelium discoideumBiologyRibonucleotide reductaseGeneGene expressionFusion geneMolecular biologyDictyosteliumPromoterGeneticsProtein subunit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report here the development of a regulated gene expression system for Dictyostelium discoideum based on the DNA-damage inducibility of the rnrB gene. rnrB, which codes for the small subunit of the enzyme ribonucleotide reductase, responds to DNA-damaging agents at all stages of the D.discoideum life cycle. Doses that have little effect on development have previously been shown to increase the level of the rnrB transcript by up to 15-fold. Here we show that all elements necessary for DNA-damage induction are contained in a 450 bp promoter fragment. We used a fusion of the rnrB promoter with the gene encoding GFP to demonstrate an up to 10-fold induction at the RNA level, which appears in all aspects similar to induction of the endogenous rnrB transcript. Using a fusion with the lacZ gene we observed an up to 7-fold induction at the protein level. These results indicate that the rnrB promoter can be used to regulate the expression of specific genes in D.discoideum. This controllable gene expression system provides the following new characteristics: the induction is rapid, taking place in the order of minutes, and the promoter is responsive at all stages of the D.discoideum life cycle.

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 score0.351

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicCellular Mechanics and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207