MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<i>RAD51</i> -Dependent Break-Induced Replication in Yeast

2004· article· en· W2157434667 on OpenAlexaff
Allison P. Davis, Lorraine S. Symington

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular and Cellular Biology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsRAD51SubtelomereRAD52Gene conversionTelomereSaccharomyces cerevisiaeDNA replicationEctopic recombinationMolecular biologyChromosomeGeneHomologous recombinationRecombinationGenetic recombination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A chromosome fragmentation assay was used to measure the efficiency and genetic control of break-induced replication (BIR) in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Formation of a chromosome fragment by de novo telomere generation at one end of the linear vector and recombination-dependent replication of 100 kb of chromosomal sequences at the other end of the vector occurred at high frequency in wild-type strains. RAD51 was required for more than 95% of BIR events involving a single-end invasion and was essential when two BIR events were required for generation of a chromosome fragment. The similar genetic requirements for BIR and gene conversion suggest a common strand invasion intermediate in these two recombinational repair processes. Mutation of RAD50 or RAD59 conferred no significant defect in BIR in either RAD51 or rad51 strains. RAD52 was shown to be essential for BIR at unique chromosomal sequences, although rare recombination events were detected between the subtelomeric Y' repeats.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations195
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular and Cellular BiologySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207