MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513113097 · doi:10.1534/genetics.116.193524

Nicotinamide Suppresses the DNA Damage Sensitivity of <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i> Independently of Sirtuin Deacetylases

2016· article· en· W2513113097 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Rössl, Amanda Bentley‐DeSousa, Yi‐Chieh Tseng, Christine C. Nwosu, Michael Downey

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSirtuins and Resveratrol in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeBiologySirtuinDNA damageNicotinamideSirtuin 1GeneticsDNA repairDNASensitivity (control systems)BiochemistryGeneAcetylationEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nicotinamide is both a reaction product and an inhibitor of the conserved sirtuin family of deacetylases, which have been implicated in a broad range of cellular functions in eukaryotes from yeast to humans. Phenotypes observed following treatment with nicotinamide are most often assumed to stem from inhibition of one or more of these enzymes. Here, we used this small molecule to inhibit multiple sirtuins at once during treatment with DNA damaging agents in the Saccharomyces cerevisiae model system. Since sirtuins have been previously implicated in the DNA damage response, we were surprised to observe that nicotinamide actually increased the survival of yeast cells exposed to the DNA damage agent MMS. Remarkably, we found that enhanced resistance to MMS in the presence of nicotinamide was independent of all five yeast sirtuins. Enhanced resistance was also independent of the nicotinamide salvage pathway, which uses nicotinamide as a substrate to generate NAD+, and of a DNA damage-induced increase in the salvage enzyme Pnc1 Our data suggest a novel and unexpected function for nicotinamide that has broad implications for its use in the study of sirtuin biology across model systems.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicSirtuins and Resveratrol in MedicineFrench-language works237,207