The proximal cis‐regulatory region of the <i>RHD</i>/<i>RHCE</i> promoter is 105 bp and contains a 55‐bp core devoid of known binding motifs but necessary for transcription
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The RhD and RhCE polypeptides are erythroid-specific members of the RH gene family. Little is known about the promoter cis-regulatory proximal region responsible for transcription. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The 1246-bp 5'-flanking regions of the RHD and RHCE promoter were amplified and ligated to a luciferase reporter vector and erythroid-specific transcription was evaluated in K562, HEL, U937, and HeLa cell lines. Deletion and substitution promoter-reporter constructs were generated to define the minimal cis-regulatory region. RESULTS: Deletion analysis in K562 cells revealed that the cis-regulatory region extended to a position between -78 and -120 relative to the site of initiation of transcription. Electrophoretic mobility shift assays confirmed binding motifs for Sp1, GATA-1, and E2F transcription factors. The use of 15-bp substitution mutagenesis showed that the minimal region required for transcription extended to -105 bp, and 6-bp substitution mutants from -35 to -90 identified a region necessary for transcription yet devoid of known cis-regulatory binding motifs. CONCLUSION: The proximal RHD/RHCE promoter regions contain cis-regulatory binding motifs and an internal sequence-dependent region that together regulate transcription. The results suggest that this region may be relevant in the weak expression of RhD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".