BRCA1 protein dose-dependent risk for embryonic oxidative DNA damage, embryopathies and neurodevelopmental disorders with and without ethanol exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although widely known as a tumor suppressor, the breast cancer 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1) is also important in development, where it regulates fetal DNA repair pathways that protect against DNA damage caused by physiological and drug-enhanced levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS). We previously showed that conditional heterozygous (+/-) knockout (cKO) mouse embryos with a minor 28% BRCA1 deficiency developed normally in culture, but when exposed to the ROS-initiating drug, alcohol (ethanol, EtOH), exhibited embryopathies not evident in wild-type (+/+) littermates. Herein, we characterized a directBrca1 +/- knockout (KO) model with a 2-fold greater (58%) reduction in BRCA1 protein vs. the cKO model. We also characterized and compared learning & memory deficits in both the cKO and KO models. Even saline-exposed Brca1 +/- vs. +/+ KO progeny exhibited enhanced oxidative DNA damage and embryopathies in embryo culture and learning & memory deficits in females in vivo, which were not observed in the cKO model, revealing the potential pathogenicity of physiological ROS levels. The embryopathic EtOH concentration for cultured direct KO embryos was half that for cKO embryos, and EtOH affected Brca1 +/+ embryos only in the direct KO model. The spectrum and severity of EtOH embryopathies in culture were greater in both Brca1 +/- vs. +/+ embryos, and direct KO vs. cKO +/- embryos. Motor coordination deficits were evident in both male and female Brca1 +/- KO progeny exposed in utero to EtOH. The results in our direct KO model with a greater BRCA1 deficiency vs. cKO mice provide the first evidence for BRCA1 protein dose-dependent susceptibility to developmental disorders caused by physiological and drug-enhanced oxidative stress.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".