Confinement induces helical organization of chromosome-like polymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Helical organization is commonly observed for a variety of biopolymers. Here we study the helical organization of two types of biopolymers, i.e., DNA-like semiflexible and bottle-brush polymers, in a cell-like confined space. A bottle-brush polymer consists of a backbone and side chains emanating from the backbone, resembling a supercoiled bacterial chromosome. Using computer simulations, we calculate 'writhe' distributions of confined biopolymers for a wide range of parameters. Our effort clarifies the conditions under which biopolymers are helically organized. While helical organization is not easily realized for DNA-like biomolecules, cylindrical confinement can induce spiral patterns in a bottle brush, similarly to what was observed with bacterial chromosomes. They also suggest that ring-shape bottle brushes have a stronger tendency for helical organization. We discuss how our results can be used to interpret chromosome experiments. For instance, they suggest that experimental resolution has unexpected consequences on writhe measurements (e.g., narrowing of the writhe distribution and kinetic separation of opposite helical states).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".