The N-terminal domain of the Agrobacterium tumefaciens telomere resolvase, TelA, regulates its DNA cleavage and rejoining activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linear replicons can be found in a minority of prokaryotic organisms, including Borrelia species and Agrobacterium tumefaciens. The problem with replicating the lagging strand end of linear DNAs is circumvented in these organisms by the presence of covalently closed DNA hairpin telomeres at the DNA termini. Telomere resolvases are enzymes responsible for generating these hairpin telomeres from a dimeric replication intermediate through a two-step DNA cleavage and rejoining reaction referred to as telomere resolution. It was previously shown that the agrobacterial telomere resolvase, TelA, possesses ssDNA annealing activity in addition to telomere resolution activity. The annealing activity derives, chiefly, from the N-terminal domain. This domain is dispensable for telomere resolution. In this study, we used activity analyses of an N-terminal domain deletion mutant, domain add back experiments, and protein-protein interaction studies and we report that the N-terminal domain of TelA is involved in inhibitory interactions with the remainder of TelA that are relieved by the binding of divalent metal ions. We also found that the regulation of telomere resolution by the N-terminal domain of TelA extends to suppression of inappropriate enzymatic activity, including hairpin telomere fusion (reaction reversal) and recombination between replicated telomeres to form a Holliday junction.
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 | 0.001 |
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".