MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2538976236 · doi:10.1080/15384101.2016.1245247

PCNA-Ub polyubiquitination inhibits cell proliferation and induces cell-cycle checkpoints

2016· article· en· W2538976236 on OpenAlexaff
Zhoushuai Qin, Zhi-Qiang Bai, Ying Sun, Xiaohong Niu, Wei Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Cycle · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProliferating cell nuclear antigenBiologyUbiquitinDNA damageCell biologyCell cycleEctopic expressionDNA replicationCHEK1Cell cycle checkpointG2-M DNA damage checkpointDNA repairMolecular biologyCell growthDNACellBiochemistryCell cultureGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to replication-blocking lesions, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) can be sequentially ubiquitinated at the K164 residue leading to 2 modes of DNA-damage tolerance, namely translesion DNA synthesis (TLS) and error-free lesion bypass. Ectopic expression of PCNA fused with ubiquitin (Ub) lacking the 2 C-terminal Gly residues resembles PCNA monoubiquitination-mediated TLS. However, if the fused Ub contains C-terminal Gly residues, it is further polyubiquitinated and inhibits cell proliferation. Unexpectedly, the polyubiquitination chain does not require any surface Lys residues and is likely to be head-to-tail linked. Such PCNA polyubiquitination interferes with replication, arrests cells at the S-phase and activates the p53 checkpoint pathway. The above cell-cycle arrest is reversible in an ATR-dependent manner, as simultaneous inhibition of ATR, but not ATM, induces apoptosis. Since ectopic expression of PCNA-Ub also induces double-strand breaks that colocalize with single-stranded DNA, we infer that this non-canonical PCNA poly-Ub chain serves as a signal to activate ATR checkpoint and recruit double-strand-break repair apparatus.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell CycleSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207