MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2726313327 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkx571

A phosphorylation-and-ubiquitylation circuitry driving ATR activation and homologous recombination

2017· article· en· W2726313327 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Christophe Dubois, Maïlyn Yates, Antoine Gaudreau-Lapierre, Geneviève Clément, Laurent Cappadocia, Luc Gaudreau, Lee Zou, Alexandre Maréchal

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomologous recombinationDNA damageReplication protein ABiologyPhosphorylationUbiquitinCell biologyDNA repairMutantDNADNA-binding proteinBiochemistryTranscription factorGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RPA-coated single-stranded DNA (RPA-ssDNA), a nucleoprotein structure induced by DNA damage, promotes ATR activation and homologous recombination (HR). RPA is hyper-phosphorylated and ubiquitylated after DNA damage. The ubiquitylation of RPA by PRP19 and RFWD3 facilitates ATR activation and HR, but how it is stimulated by DNA damage is still unclear. Here, we show that RFWD3 binds RPA constitutively, whereas PRP19 recognizes RPA after DNA damage. The recruitment of PRP19 by RPA depends on PIKK-mediated RPA phosphorylation and a positively charged pocket in PRP19. An RPA32 mutant lacking phosphorylation sites fails to recruit PRP19 and support RPA ubiquitylation. PRP19 mutants unable to bind RPA or lacking ubiquitin ligase activity also fail to support RPA ubiquitylation and HR. These results suggest that RPA phosphorylation enhances the recruitment of PRP19 to RPA-ssDNA and stimulates RPA ubiquitylation through a process requiring both PRP19 and RFWD3, thereby triggering a phosphorylation-ubiquitylation circuitry that promotes ATR activation and HR.

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)0.001
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 score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations47
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207