Zebrafish HSF4: a novel protein that shares features of both HSF1 and HSF4 of mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat-shock proteins (hsps) have important roles in the development of the eye lens. We previously demonstrated that knockdown of hsp70 gene expression using morpholino antisense technology resulted in an altered lens phenotype in zebrafish embryos. A less severe phenotype was seen with knockdown of heat-shock factor 1 (HSF1), suggesting that, while it likely plays a role in hsp70 regulation during lens formation, other regulatory factors are also involved. Heat-shock factor 4 plays an important role in mammalian lens development, and an expressed sequence tag encoding zebrafish HSF4 has been identified. The deduced amino acid sequence shares structural similarities with mammalian HSF4 including the lack of an HR-C domain. However, the HR-C domain is absent due to a severe C-terminal truncation within zebrafish HSF4 (zHSF4) relative to the mammalian protein. Surprisingly, the amino acid composition of the zHSF4 DNA binding domain shares a greater degree of identity with HSF1 proteins than it does with mammalian HSF4 proteins. Consistent with this, the binding affinity of in vitro synthesized zHSF4 for discontinuous heat-shock response element sequences is more limited, similar to what has been previously observed for HSF1 proteins. Hsf4 mRNA is expressed in zebrafish adult eye tissue but is only observed in developing embryonic tissue at 60 h post-fertilization or later. This, together with the lack of an observable phenotype following morpholino-based antisense knockdown of hsf4, suggests that zHSF4 is unlikely to play a role in regulating early embryonic lens development.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".