MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167096616 · doi:10.1128/jvi.02451-06

Model for T-Antigen-Dependent Melting of the Simian Virus 40 Core Origin Based on Studies of the Interaction of the Beta-Hairpin with DNA

2007· article· en· W2167096616 on OpenAlexafffund
Anuradha Kumar, Gretchen Meinke, Danielle K. Reese, Stephanie Moine, Paul J. Phelan, Amélie Fradet‐Turcotte, Jacques Archambault, Andrew Bohm, Peter A. Bullock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPolyomavirus and related diseases
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyHelicaseDNADuplex (building)Prokaryotic DNA replicationMolecular biologyDNA replicationOrigin of replicationBiophysicsVirologyRNAGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interaction of simian virus 40 (SV40) T antigen (T-ag) with the viral origin has served as a model for studies of site-specific recognition of a eukaryotic replication origin and the mechanism of DNA unwinding. These studies have revealed that a motif termed the "beta-hairpin" is necessary for assembly of T-ag on the SV40 origin. Herein it is demonstrated that residues at the tip of the "beta-hairpin" are needed to melt the origin-flanking regions and that the T-ag helicase domain selectively assembles around one of the newly generated single strands in a manner that accounts for its 3'-to-5' helicase activity. Furthermore, T-ags mutated at the tip of the "beta-hairpin" are defective for oligomerization on duplex DNA; however, they can assemble on hybrid duplex DNA or single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) substrates provided the strand containing the 3' extension is present. Collectively, these experiments indicate that residues at the tip of the beta-hairpin generate ssDNA in the core origin and that the ssDNA is essential for subsequent oligomerization events.

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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations31
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VirologySame topicPolyomavirus and related diseasesFrench-language works237,207