MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735446066 · doi:10.1101/gad.298232.117

From structure to mechanism—understanding initiation of DNA replication

2017· review· en· W2735446066 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alberto Riera, Marta Barbon, Yasunori Noguchi, L. Reuter, Sarah Schneider, Christian Speck

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes & Development · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilWellcomeMedical Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological SciencesMedical Research Council CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsBiologyReplication (statistics)Mechanism (biology)DNA replicationOrigin recognition complexComputational biologyPre-replication complexGeneticsDNAEukaryotic DNA replicationDNA replication factor CDT1Control of chromosome duplicationCell biologyEvolutionary biologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA replication results in the doubling of the genome prior to cell division. This process requires the assembly of 50 or more protein factors into a replication fork. Here, we review recent structural and biochemical insights that start to explain how specific proteins recognize DNA replication origins, load the replicative helicase on DNA, unwind DNA, synthesize new DNA strands, and reassemble chromatin. We focus on the minichromosome maintenance (MCM2-7) proteins, which form the core of the eukaryotic replication fork, as this complex undergoes major structural rearrangements in order to engage with DNA, regulate its DNA-unwinding activity, and maintain genome stability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations107
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes & DevelopmentSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207