Potential biological role of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) in male gametes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maintaining the integrity of sperm DNA is vital to reproduction and male fertility. Sperm contain a number of molecules and pathways for the repair of base excision, base mismatches and DNA strand breaks. The presence of Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), a DNA repair enzyme, and its homologues has recently been shown in male germ cells, specifically during stage VII of spermatogenesis. High PARP expression has been reported in mature spermatozoa and in proven fertile men. Whenever there are strand breaks in sperm DNA due to oxidative stress, chromatin remodeling or cell death, PARP is activated. However, the cleavage of PARP by caspase-3 inactivates it and inhibits PARP's DNA-repairing abilities. Therefore, cleaved PARP (cPARP) may be considered a marker of apoptosis. The presence of higher levels of cPARP in sperm of infertile men adds a new proof for the correlation between apoptosis and male infertility. This review describes the possible biological significance of PARP in mammalian cells with the focus on male reproduction. The review elaborates on the role played by PARP during spermatogenesis, sperm maturation in ejaculated spermatozoa and the potential role of PARP as new marker of sperm damage. PARP could provide new strategies to preserve fertility in cancer patients subjected to genotoxic stresses and may be a key to better male reproductive health.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".