MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4293055549 · doi:10.1101/2022.06.27.497340

Human RAD52 stimulates the RAD51-mediated homology search

2022· preprint· en· W4293055549 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Akbar Muhammad, Thibault Peterlini, José Guirouilh-Barbat, Xavier Veaute, Didier Busso, Bernard S. López, Jean‐Yves Masson, Gerard Mazón, Éric Le Cam, P. Dupaigne

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHôtel-Dieu de Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité Paris-SudAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsRAD51RAD52Homologous recombinationCell biologyBiologyDNA repairHomologous chromosomeHomology (biology)MediatorHomology directed repairDNAGeneticsNucleotide excision repairGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Homologous recombination (HR) is a DNA repair mechanism of double strand breaks and blocked replication forks that involves a process of homology search and homologous pairing leading to the formation of synaptic intermediates whose architecture and dynamics are tightly regulated to ensure genome integrity. In this mechanism, RAD51 recombinase plays a central role and is supported by many partner including BRCA2 and RAD52. If the mediator function of BRCA2 to load RAD51 on RPA-covered ssDNA is well established, the role of RAD52 in HR, more precisely its interplay with BRCA2 is still far from understood. We have used Transmission Electron Microscopy combined with biochemistry to characterize the sequential participation of RPA, RAD52 and BRCA2 in the assembly of the RAD51 filament, its architecture and its activity. Despite our results confirm that RAD52 lacks a mediator activity, we observed that RAD52 can tightly bind to RPA-coated ssDNA, inhibit the mediator role of BRCA2 and form shorter RAD52- and RAD51-containing mixed filaments that are more efficient in subsequent homology search and formation of synaptic complexes and D-loops, resulting in more frequent multi-invasions as well. Through the characterization of the behavior of RAD52 and BRCA2, these results provide new molecular insights on the formation and regulation of presynaptic and synaptic intermediates during human HR.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicDNA Repair Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→