***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature
***DOCUMENTATION*** 
***EXAMPLES*** 
Input:
Output:

***EXAMPLES***
Input: Functionally analogous enzymes are those that catalyze similar reactions on similar substrates but do not share common ancestry, providing a window on the different structural strategies nature has used to evolve required catalysts. Identification and use of this information to improve reaction classification and computational annotation of enzymes newly discovered in the genome projects would benefit from systematic determination of reaction similarities. Here, we quantified similarity in bond changes for overall reactions and catalytic mechanisms for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes (non-homologous enzymes with identical first three numbers of their EC codes) from the MACiE database. Similarity of overall reactions was computed by comparing the sets of bond changes in the transformations from substrates to products. For similarity of mechanisms, sets of bond changes occurring in each mechanistic step were compared; these similarities were then used to guide global and local alignments of mechanistic steps. Using this metric, only 44% of pairs of functionally analogous enzymes in the dataset had significantly similar overall reactions. For these enzymes, convergence to the same mechanism occurred in 33% of cases, with most pairs having at least one identical mechanistic step. Using our metric, overall reaction similarity serves as an upper bound for mechanistic similarity in functional analogs. For example, the four carbon-oxygen lyases acting on phosphates (EC 4.2.3) show neither significant overall reaction similarity nor significant mechanistic similarity. By contrast, the three carboxylic-ester hydrolases (EC 3.1.1) catalyze overall reactions with identical bond changes and have converged to almost identical mechanisms. The large proportion of enzyme pairs that do not show significant overall reaction similarity (56%) suggests that at least for the functionally analogous enzymes studied here, more stringent criteria could be used to refine definitions of EC sub-subclasses for improved discrimination in their classification of enzyme reactions. The results also indicate that mechanistic convergence of reaction steps is widespread, suggesting that quantitative measurement of mechanistic similarity can inform approaches for functional annotation.
Output:  When species evolve, their genes duplicate and diverge to allow for adaptation of their functional repertoires to the changing environment. In this scenario, unrelated genes can convergently evolve to produce proteins with the same molecular function, termed “functionally analogous.” A quantitative determination of the reaction similarities among functionally analogous enzymes could provide insight about the different structural solutions nature has used to evolve similar catalysts. Bond changes between substrates and products, and between successive reaction intermediates, were used to compare the reactions catalyzed and the mechanisms of catalysis for 95 pairs of functionally analogous enzymes. Less than half of the reactions catalyzed by unrelated enzymes, but defined as similar by the Enzyme Commission (EC) classification, are similar in terms of bond changes, suggesting that this classification often fails to capture quantitative differences between many enzyme reactions. Furthermore, we addressed for the first time whether the chemical mechanisms by which similar overall reactions are achieved in functional analogs are also similar. We conclude that convergence of reaction is often accompanied by convergence of chemical mechanism. These results will be useful for classifying enzymes, guiding functional annotation of newly determined enzyme sequences and structures and for informing the engineering of enzymes with new functions.

Input:  Mitosis and meiosis are two distinct cell division programs. During mitosis, sister chromatids separate, whereas during the first meiotic division, homologous chromosomes pair and then segregate from each other. In most organisms, germ cells do both programs sequentially, as they first amplify through mitosis, before switching to meiosis to produce haploid gametes. Here, we show that autosomal chromosomes are unpaired at their centromeres in Drosophila germline stem cells, and become paired during the following four mitosis of the differentiating daughter cell. Surprisingly, we further demonstrate that components of the central region of the synaptonemal complex are already expressed in the mitotic region of the ovaries, localize close to centromeres, and promote de novo association of centromeres. Our results thus show that meiotic proteins and meiotic organization of centromeres, which are key features to ensure reductional segregation, are laid out in amplifying germ cells, before meiosis has started.


Output:

Meiosis is a special type of cell division occurring in germ cells to produce sexual gametes. Initially, germ cells contain two copies of each chromosome, one from the mother and one from the father, which are called homologs. During meiosis, cells divide twice to produce haploid gametes with only one copy of each chromosome. Each gamete receives exactly one copy of each chromosome, because homologs become associated, through a process called meiotic pairing, and then segregate from each other during the first round of division. In Drosophila, it was assumed that homologs were always paired in every cell type. Meiotic pairing was thus viewed as an extension of a pre-existing pairing. Here, we show that chromosomes II and III are not paired in germline stem cells, which produce germ cells throughout adult life. We further show that these chromosomes become paired during the four rounds of mitosis preceding the entry in meiosis. Surprisingly, meiotic proteins are expressed during these four rounds of mitosis and are required for homologs to pair. Our results thus show that, in Drosophila, meiosis starts during the preceding mitosis.
