DNA Binding by the ETS Protein TEL (ETV6) Is Regulated by Autoinhibition and Self-association
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ETS protein TEL, a transcriptional repressor, contains a PNT domain that, as an isolated fragment in vitro, self-associates to form a head-to-tail polymer. How such polymerization might affect the DNA-binding properties of full-length TEL is unclear. Here we report that monomeric TEL binds to a consensus ETS site with unusually low affinity (K(d) = 2.8 x 10(-8) M). A deletion analysis demonstrated that the low affinity was caused by a C-terminal inhibitory domain (CID) that attenuates DNA binding by approximately 10-fold. An NMR spectroscopically derived structure of a TEL fragment, deposited in the Protein Data Bank, revealed that the CID consists of two alpha-helices, one of which appears to block the DNA binding surface of the TEL ETS domain. Based on this structure, we substituted two conserved glutamic acids (Glu-431 and Glu-434) with alanines and found that this activated DNA binding and enhanced trypsin sensitivity in the CID. We propose that TEL displays a conformational equilibrium between inhibited and activated states and that electrostatic interactions involving these negatively charged residues play a role in stabilizing the inhibited conformation. Using a TEL dimer as a model polymer, we show that self-association facilitates cooperative binding to DNA. Cooperativity was observed on DNA duplexes containing tandem consensus ETS sites at variable spacing and orientations, suggesting flexibility in the region of TEL linking its self-associating PNT domain and DNA-binding ETS domain. We speculate that TEL compensates for the low affinity, which is caused by autoinhibition, by binding to DNA as a cooperative polymer.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".