SUMO as a nuclear hormone receptor effector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animal development is driven by robust, cell-specific gene expression programs. Understanding mechanistically how a single transcription factor (TF) can govern distinct programs with exquisite precision is a major challenge. We view TFs as signal integrators, taking information from co-regulator interactions, post-translational modifications, other transcription factors, chromatin state, DNA sequence and in some cases, specific noncovalent ligands, to determine the collection of genes regulated by a TF at any given time. Here, we describe a reductionist approach to combinatorial transcriptional regulation, focusing on a single C. elegans TF, the nuclear hormone receptor NHR-25, and a single post-translational modification, SUMO. We suggest that the ratio of sumoylated to unsumoylated NHR-25 could specify a switch-like cell-fate decision during vulval development. Direct examination of this "SUMO ratio" in vivo is challenging and we discuss possible solutions going forward. We also consider how sumoylation of multiple substrates might be coordinated during vulval development. Finally, we note that iteration of this approach could leverage our sumoylation findings to define the roles of other effectors of NHR-25 in the developing vulva and in other tissues.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".