DNA polymerase proofreading: active site switching catalyzed by the bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA polymerases achieve high-fidelity DNA replication in part by checking the accuracy of each nucleotide that is incorporated and, if a mistake is made, the incorrect nucleotide is removed before further primer extension takes place. In order to proofread, the primer-end must be separated from the template strand and transferred from the polymerase to the exonuclease active center where the excision reaction takes place; then the trimmed primer-end is returned to the polymerase active center. Thus, proofreading requires polymerase-to-exonuclease and exonuclease-to-polymerase active site switching. We have used a fluorescence assay that uses differences in the fluorescence intensity of 2-aminopurine (2AP) to measure the rates of active site switching for the bacteriophage T4 DNA polymerase. There are three findings: (i) the rate of return of the trimmed primer-end from the exonuclease to the polymerase active center is rapid, >500 s(-1); (ii) T4 DNA polymerase can remove two incorrect nucleotides under single turnover conditions, which includes presumed exonuclease-to-polymerase and polymerase-to-exonuclease active site switching steps and (iii) proofreading reactions that initiate in the polymerase active center are not intrinsically processive.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".