Co-variation of STI1 and WDR36/UTP21 alters cell proliferation in a glaucoma model.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the role of multigenic variation in primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) involving the rRNA processing gene WD repeat domain 36 (WDR36). METHODS: We examined the heat shock protein 70/90 (HSP70/90)-organizing co-chaperone stress-induced-phosphoprotein 1 (STI1) as a potential co-modifying gene in glaucoma patients found to harbor WDR36 amino acid variation. The STI1 gene was sequenced and its POAG-associated amino acid variant K434R, as well as the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) P173T, were tested for functional defects in a yeast model system previously used to characterize WDR36 variants (using the homologous yeast gene U3 protein 21 [UTP21]). RESULTS: A POAG patient heterozygous for the WDR36 variant L25P was discovered to also carry the STI1 variant K434R in a heterozygous state. Variant K434R, located at an evolutionarily-conserved site, was not found in a pool of clinically-examined individuals lacking WDR36 variation which included 55 normal controls and 20 patients with normal tension glaucoma (NTG). STI1 (K434R) and the homologous yeast variant K470R were able to rescue yeast growth-inhibition by the HSP90-inhibitor radicicol. Double mutant haploid strains expressing human STI1 (K434R) and recombinant yeast UTP21 variants did not have significantly different levels of 18S rRNA from the corresponding hSTI1 (WT) strains. However, specific double mutant K434R strains exhibited significantly slower culture growth at 37 °C. Double mutant P173T strains also displayed altered growth rates at 37 °C. CONCLUSIONS: STI1 variation does not play a significant direct role in the genetics of POAG. However, as previously found for the STI1 null allele, non-synonymous variants of human STI1 confer growth dysregulation in the context of specific yeast UTP21 mutations and heat stress. Based on the genetic association of two co-heterozygous STI1 and WDR36 variants in a POAG patient and the functional analyses performed in a model system for basic eukaryotic cellular processes, these experiments point to a conserved molecular pathway involving STI1 and WDR36.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".