Single-stranded DNA mimicry in the p53 transactivation domain interaction with replication protein A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of many protein-protein interactions modulated upon DNA damage is that of the single-stranded DNA-binding protein, replication protein A (RPA), with the p53 tumor suppressor. Here we report the crystal structure of RPA residues 1-120 (RPA70N) bound to the N-terminal transactivation domain of p53 (residues 37-57; p53N) and, by using NMR spectroscopy, characterize two mechanisms by which the RPA/p53 interaction can be modulated. RPA70N forms an oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide-binding fold, similar to that previously observed for the ssDNA-binding domains of RPA. In contrast, the N-terminal p53 transactivation domain is largely disordered in solution, but residues 37-57 fold into two amphipathic helices, H1 and H2, upon binding with RPA70N. The H2 helix of p53 structurally mimics the binding of ssDNA to the oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide-binding fold. NMR experiments confirmed that both ssDNA and an acidic peptide mimicking a phosphorylated form of RPA32N can independently compete the acidic p53N out of the binding site. Taken together, our data suggest a mechanism for DNA damage signaling that can explain a threshold response to DNA damage.
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) | 0.001 | 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".