MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967687150 · doi:10.1042/bst20180402

A quest for coordination among activities at the replisome

2019· review· en· W2967687150 on OpenAlexafffund
Nitin Kapadia, Rodrigo Reyes‐Lamothe

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Society Transactions · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsReplisomeEvolutionary biologyBiologyChemistryGeneticsDNA replication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Faithful DNA replication is required for transmission of the genetic material across generations. The basic mechanisms underlying this process are shared among all organisms: progressive unwinding of the long double-stranded DNA; synthesis of RNA primers; and synthesis of a new DNA chain. These activities are invariably performed by a multi-component machine called the replisome. A detailed description of this molecular machine has been achieved in prokaryotes and phages, with the replication processes in eukaryotes being comparatively less known. However, recent breakthroughs in the in vitro reconstitution of eukaryotic replisomes have resulted in valuable insight into their functions and mechanisms. In conjunction with the developments in eukaryotic replication, an emerging overall view of replisomes as dynamic protein ensembles is coming into fruition. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the recent insights into the dynamic nature of the bacterial replisome, revealed through single-molecule techniques, and to describe some aspects of the eukaryotic replisome under this framework. We primarily focus on Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae (budding yeast), since a significant amount of literature is available for these two model organisms. We end with a description of the methods of live-cell fluorescence microscopy for the characterization of replisome dynamics.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.275 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical Society TransactionsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207