2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.cbi.2020.109313
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA binding and antiradical potential of ethyl pyruvate: Key to the DNA radioprotection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2) showed that 25 112 results were annotated and divided into three functional groups, namely, biological process (33.52%), molecular function (28.65%) and cell component (37.83%). The 10 most significant differences were DNA binding, transcription DNA-templated, zinc ion binding, G2/M transition of mitotic cell cycle, adhesion of symbiont to host, tryptophan biosynthetic process, asexual spore wall assembly, differentially expressed genes are closely related to cell stress resistance, proliferation, tissue repair, adhesion and cell structure (Zámborszky, 2013;Swirnoff et al, 1995;Sharma et al, 2020). Results did not clearly reflect or speculate the existence of the gossypol-degrading gene in AN.…”
Section: Fig 2 Go Functional Annotation Of Differentially Expressed Genes Under the Gossypol Stressmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…2) showed that 25 112 results were annotated and divided into three functional groups, namely, biological process (33.52%), molecular function (28.65%) and cell component (37.83%). The 10 most significant differences were DNA binding, transcription DNA-templated, zinc ion binding, G2/M transition of mitotic cell cycle, adhesion of symbiont to host, tryptophan biosynthetic process, asexual spore wall assembly, differentially expressed genes are closely related to cell stress resistance, proliferation, tissue repair, adhesion and cell structure (Zámborszky, 2013;Swirnoff et al, 1995;Sharma et al, 2020). Results did not clearly reflect or speculate the existence of the gossypol-degrading gene in AN.…”
Section: Fig 2 Go Functional Annotation Of Differentially Expressed Genes Under the Gossypol Stressmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…showed that 25 112 results were annotated and divided into three functional groups, namely, biological process (33.52%), molecular function (28.65%) and cell component (37.83%). The 10 most signi cant differences were DNA binding, transcription DNA-templated, zinc ion binding, G2/M transition of mitotic cell cycle, adhesion of symbiont to host, tryptophan biosynthetic process, asexual spore wall assembly, differentially expressed genes are closely related to cell stress resistance, proliferation, tissue repair, adhesion and cell structure[17][18][19]. Results did not clearly re ect or speculate the existence of the gossypol-degrading gene in AN.…”
mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…The direct mechanism of action is determined by the direct interaction of endogenous or exogenous factors with the DNA molecule, which leads to the breakdown of chemical bonds at the DNA level and initiates changes in its spatial structure [44,45]. The mechanism of mediated action by exogenous and endogenous factors is realized through their metabolism and activation of intermediate products, whose interaction with DNA underlies its damage [46,47]. While exogenous and endogenous factors have a great potential for modifying genetic information, the relative contribution of internal and external factors to the incidence of cancer remains uncertain [6].…”
Section: Sources and Types Of Dna Damagementioning
confidence: 99%