Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integrity of the genome is essential to the health of the individual and to the reproductive success of a species. Transmission of genetic information is in a selective balance between two opposing forces, the maintenance of genetic stability versus elimination of mutational change and loss of evolutionary potential. Caenorhabditis elegans provides many advantages for the study of DNA surveillance and repair in a multicellular organism. Several genes have been identified by mutagenesis and RNA interference that affect DNA damage checkpoint and repair functions. Many of these DNA damage response genes also play essential roles in DNA replication, cell cycle control, development, meiosis and mitosis. To date, no obvious DNA damage-induced checkpoint has been described in C. elegans somatic cells. In contrast, the DNA damage response in the germ line is characterized by two spatially separate checkpoints; mitotic germ nuclei proliferation arrest and apoptosis of damaged meiotic nuclei. Both of these responses are regulated by checkpoint genes including mrt-2, hus-1, rad-5 and cep-1, the C. elegans ortholog of the human tumour suppressor p53. The germ line DNA damage checkpoints in C. elegans provide an excellent model in which to study the genes required to maintain genomic stability and to test compounds which might have tumor suppressing properties. In addition to single gene studies, integration of data from high-throughput screens has identified genes not previous implicated in the DNA damage response and elucidated novel connections between the different repair pathways. Most of the genes involved are conserved between worms and humans, and in humans, are associated with either oncogenesis or tumor-suppression. Thus, studies of the physical and functional interactions of the components of the repair pathways in C. elegans will provide information about human repair disorders and cancer predisposition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.114 | 0.128 |
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".