Separation-Based Approach to Study Dissociation Kinetics of Noncovalent DNA–Multiple Protein Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Noncovalent binding of DNA with multiple proteins is pivotal to many regulatory cellular processes. Due to the lack of experimental approaches, the kinetics of assembly and disassembly of DNA-multiple proteins complexes have never been studied. Here, we report on a first method capable of measuring disassembly kinetics of such complexes. The method is based on continuous spatial separation of different complexes. The kinetics of multiple complex dissociation processes are also spatially separated, which in turn facilitates finding their rate constants. Our separation-based approach was compared with a conventional no-separation approach by using computer simulation of dissociation kinetics. It proved to be much more accurate than the no-separation approach and to be a powerful tool for testing hypothetical mechanisms of the disassembly of DNA-multiple proteins complexes. An experimental implementation of the separation-based approach was finally demonstrated by using capillary electrophoresis as a separation method. The interaction between an 80 nucleotide long single-stranded DNA and single-stranded DNA binding protein was studied. DNA-protein complexes with one and two proteins were observed, and rate constants of their dissociation were determined. We foresee that a separation approach will be also developed to study the kinetics of the formation of DNA-multiple protein complexes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".