Homologous recombination contributes to the repair of acetaldehyde-induced DNA damages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Acetaldehyde, a chemical that can cause DNA damage and contribute to cancer, is prevalently present in our environment, e.g., in alcohol, tobacco, and food. Although aldehyde potentially promotes crosslinking reaction among biological substances including DNA, RNA, and proteins, it remains unclear what types of DNA damage are caused by acetaldehyde and how they are repaired. In this study, we examined acetaldehyde sensitivity of DNA damage-deficient cells established from human TK6 cell line. Among the mutants, mismatch repair mutants did not show a hypersensitivity to acetaldehyde, while cells deficient in base and nucleotide excision repair pathways increased its sensitivity. We found a delayed repair and hypersensitivity in homologous recombination (HR)-deficient cells but not in non-homologous end joining-deficient cells after acetaldehyde treatment. By analyzing the formation of acetaldehyde-induced RAD51 foci, which represent HR intermediates, HR-deficient cells, but not NHEJ, exhibits delayed repair of acetaldehyde-induced DNA damages, compared with wild-type . These results suggest that acetaldehyde causes complex DNA damages that requires various types of repair pathways. Interestingly, mutants deficient in TDP1 and TDP2, which are involved in the removal of protein adducts from DNA ends, exhibited hypersensitivity to acetaldehyde. the acetaldehyde sensitivity of the TDP1 -/- /RAD54 -/- double mutant was similar to that of each single mutant. This epistatic relationship between TDP1 and RAD54 suggests that that the removal of protein-DNA adducts generated by acetaldehyde needs to be removed for efficient repair by HR. Our study would help understand the molecular mechanism of genotoxic and mutagenic effects of acetaldehyde.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".