Use of a Small Palindrome Genetic Marker to Investigate Mechanisms of Double-Strand-Break Repair in Mammalian Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined mechanisms of mammalian homologous recombination using a gene targeting assay in which the vector-borne region of homology to the chromosome bore small palindrome insertions that frequently escape mismatch repair when encompassed within heteroduplex DNA (hDNA). Our assay permitted the product(s) of each independent recombination event to be recovered for molecular analysis. The results revealed the following: (i) vector-borne double-strand break (DSB) processing usually did not yield a large double-strand gap (DSG); (ii) in 43% of the recombinants, the results were consistent with crossover at or near the DSB; and (iii) in the remaining recombinants, hDNA was an intermediate. The sectored (mixed) genotypes observed in 38% of the recombinants provided direct evidence for involvement of hDNA, while indirect evidence was obtained from the patterns of mismatch repair (MMR). Individual hDNA tracts were either long or short and asymmetric or symmetric on the one side of the DSB examined. Clonal analysis of the sectored recombinants revealed how vector-borne and chromosomal markers were linked in each strand of individual hDNA intermediates. As expected, vector-borne and chromosomal markers usually resided on opposite strands. However, in one recombinant, they were linked on the same strand. The results are discussed with particular reference to the double-strand-break repair (DSBR) model of recombination.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".