MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790583237 · doi:10.1002/2211-5463.12384

Suboptimal extracellular <scp>pH</scp> values alter <scp>DNA</scp> damage response to induced double‐strand breaks

2018· article· en· W2790583237 on OpenAlexafffund
Julien Massonneau, C Ouellet, Fabrice Lucien, Claire M. Dubois, Jessica K. Tyler, Guylain Boissonneault

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Open Bio · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of SydneyNational Cancer InstituteFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsExtracellularChemistryDNA damageDNABiochemistryBiophysicsCell biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conditions leading to unrepaired DNA double-stranded breaks are potent inducers of genetic instability. Systemic conditions may lead to fluctuation of hydrogen ions in the cellular microenvironment, and we show that small variations in extracellular pH, termed suboptimal pHe, can decrease the efficiency of DNA repair in the absence of intracellular pH variation. Recovery from bleomycin-induced DNA double-stranded breaks in fibroblasts proceeded less efficiently at suboptimal pHe values ranging from 7.2 to 6.9, as shown by the persistence of repair foci, reduction of H4K16 acetylation, and chromosomal instability, while senescence or apoptosis remained undetected. By allowing escape from these protective mechanisms, suboptimal pHe may therefore enhance the genotoxicity of double-stranded breaks, leading to genetic instability.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS Open BioSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207