Five repair pathways in one context: chromatin modification during DNA repairThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 27th International West Coast Chromatin and Chromosome Conference, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The eukaryotic cell is faced with more than 10 000 various kinds of DNA lesions per day. Failure to repair such lesions can lead to mutations, genomic instability, or cell death. Therefore, cells have developed 5 major repair pathways in which different kinds of DNA damage can be detected and repaired: homologous recombination, nonhomologous end joining, nucleotide excision repair, base excision repair, and mismatch repair. However, the efficient repair of DNA damage is complicated by the fact that the genomic DNA is packaged through histone and nonhistone proteins into chromatin, a highly condensed structure that hinders DNA accessibility and its subsequent repair. Therefore, the cellular repair machinery has to circumvent this natural barrier to gain access to the damaged site in a timely manner. Repair of DNA lesions in the context of chromatin occurs with the assistance of ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling enzymes and histone-modifying enzymes, which allow access of the necessary repair factors to the lesion. Here we review recent studies that elucidate the interplay between chromatin modifiers / remodelers and the major DNA repair pathways.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".