Contribution of Individual Amino Acids to the Nucleic Acid Binding Activities of the <i>Xenopus</i> Zinc Finger Proteins TFIIIIA and p43
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Xenopus transcription factor IIIIA (TFIIIA) binds to both 5S RNA and the 5S RNA gene in immature oocytes, an interaction mediated by nine zinc fingers. To determine the role of the central zinc fingers of the protein in these nucleic acid binding activities, a series of substitution mutants of TFIIIA were constructed and expressed as recombinant proteins in Escherichia coli. The mutant proteins were purified to homogeneity and analyzed for DNA and RNA binding activities using a nitrocellulose filter binding assay. Finger 5, but not finger 4, 6, or 7, is involved in sequence-specific binding to the 5S RNA gene. A TWT amino acid motif in finger 6 makes a significant contribution to the binding of TFIIIA to 5S RNA, while mutations in fingers 4, 5, and 7 have little or no effect on RNA binding by TFIIIA. In striking contrast, a TWT motif in finger 6 of p43, another Xenopus zinc finger protein that binds to 5S RNA, is not necessary for 5S RNA binding by this protein. Evidence for the presence of inhibitory finger-finger interactions that limit the nucleic acid binding properties of individual zinc fingers within TFIIIA and p43 is discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".