MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323313579 · doi:10.5772/intechopen.110267

The Importance of the Fifth Nucleotide in DNA: Uracil

2023· book-chapter· en· W4323313579 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntechOpen eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsUracilDeaminationCytosineThymineDNAUracil-DNA glycosylaseDNA glycosylaseGuanineChemistryBase pairBiochemistryBiologyNucleotideDNA repairMolecular biologyGeneEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uracil is a ribonucleotide found in both DNA and RNA, with the main difference between the two being the presence of thymine in DNA and uracil in RNA. Although thymine and uracil are similar in function and can form the same base pairs with adenine, the presence of uracil in DNA can affect DNA stability and modulate cell-specific functions. Without repair mechanisms to remove uracil from DNA, cytosine deamination can occur, resulting in gene drift that is not tolerable in organisms. While the deamination of cytosine in DNA signals damage, a corresponding deamination in RNA would yield normal RNA constituents. To correct this, uracil DNA glycosylases detect and remove uracil bases from uracil-containing DNA, but not natural thymine-containing DNA. The mechanisms of uracil incorporation into DNA, its roles in DNA, cellular mechanisms to detect and remove uracil, and the clinical utility of uracil in DNA will be discussed in this chapter.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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