The nucleosome: orchestrating DNA damage signaling and repair within chromatin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA damage occurs within the chromatin environment, which ultimately participates in regulating DNA damage response (DDR) pathways and repair of the lesion. DNA damage activates a cascade of signaling events that extensively modulates chromatin structure and organization to coordinate DDR factor recruitment to the break and repair, whilst also promoting the maintenance of normal chromatin functions within the damaged region. For example, DDR pathways must avoid conflicts between other DNA-based processes that function within the context of chromatin, including transcription and replication. The molecular mechanisms governing the recognition, target specificity, and recruitment of DDR factors and enzymes to the fundamental repeating unit of chromatin, i.e., the nucleosome, are poorly understood. Here we present our current view of how chromatin recognition by DDR factors is achieved at the level of the nucleosome. Emerging evidence suggests that the nucleosome surface, including the nucleosome acidic patch, promotes the binding and activity of several DNA damage factors on chromatin. Thus, in addition to interactions with damaged DNA and histone modifications, nucleosome recognition by DDR factors plays a key role in orchestrating the requisite chromatin response to maintain both genome and epigenome integrity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".