MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235475498 · doi:10.1534/g3.118.200213

Role of Translesion Synthesis DNA Polymerases in DNA Replication in the Presence of a Weak DNA Polymerase δ in <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>

2018· article· en· W4235475498 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Likui Zhang, Yanchao Huang, Xinyuan Zhu, Yuxiao Wang, Haoqiang Shi, Min Chen, Kunming Dong, Xiaojian Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueG3 Genes Genomes Genetics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA polymeraseDNA polymerase IIDNA clampDNA replicationPolymeraseDNA polymerase deltaEukaryotic DNA replicationSaccharomyces cerevisiaeDNA polymerase muDNADNA synthesisBiologyCell biologyGeneticsChemistryMolecular biologyCircular bacterial chromosomePolymerase chain reactionGeneReverse transcriptase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This retraction has been requested by the corresponding author Likui Zhang, citing authorship concerns detailed below. The article (10.1534/g3.117.300097) was submitted and approved for publication without proper acknowledgement of funding, experiment design, data interpretation, and manuscript contributions contributed by Dr. Linda Reha-Krantz of the University of Alberta, Canada and additional research personnel and several students. All work by Dr. Zhang was done under the supervision of Dr. Reha-Krantz in Reha-Krantz’s lab, the experiments designed by Reha-Krantz, and the research funded by Reha-Krantz’s grants. Dr. Zhang was involved with the research as a Postdoctoral Scholar in Dr. Reha-Krantz’s lab and shared in the research with Alina Radziwon and RanRan Zhang who constructed the mutant strains. Dr. Linda Reha-Krantz has declined to be listed as an author due to various concerns, which had been shared with Dr. Zhang. Additionally, the authors listed on the early online version of the paper do not meet authorship criteria for G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics, which was discovered by G3 post-publication after Dr. Zhang’s requested removal of the authors. Both Dr. Zhang and G3 apologize to our readers for any inconvenience caused by this retraction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueG3 Genes Genomes GeneticsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207