MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045641516 · doi:10.1042/bcj20190579

DNA-damage tolerance through PCNA ubiquitination and sumoylation

2020· review· en· W3045641516 on OpenAlexaff
Li Fan, Tonghui Bi, Linxiao Wang, Wei Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemical Journal · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProliferating cell nuclear antigenBiologyDNA damageDNA replicationDNA repairDNA polymeraseSUMO proteinUbiquitinReplication factor CReplication protein ACell biologySaccharomyces cerevisiaeDNA clampDNA polymerase deltaPostreplication repairDNAMolecular biologyEukaryotic DNA replicationDNA mismatch repairGeneticsGeneDNA-binding proteinReverse transcriptasePolymerase chain reactionTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA-damage tolerance (DDT) is employed by eukaryotic cells to bypass replication-blocking lesions induced by DNA-damaging agents. In budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, DDT is mediated by RAD6 epistatic group genes and the central event for DDT is sequential ubiquitination of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), a DNA clamp required for replication and DNA repair. DDT consists of two parallel pathways: error-prone DDT is mediated by PCNA monoubiquitination, which recruits translesion synthesis DNA polymerases to bypass lesions with decreased fidelity; and error-free DDT is mediated by K63-linked polyubiquitination of PCNA at the same residue of monoubiquitination, which facilitates homologous recombination-mediated template switch. Interestingly, the same PCNA residue is also subjected to sumoylation, which leads to inhibition of unwanted recombination at replication forks. All three types of PCNA posttranslational modifications require dedicated conjugating and ligation enzymes, and these enzymes are highly conserved in eukaryotes, from yeast to human.

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 score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemical JournalSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207