PHF6 Interacts with the Nucleosome Remodeling and Deacetylation (NuRD) Complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutations in PHF6 are the cause of Börjeson-Forssman-Lehman syndrome (BFLS), an X-linked intellectual disability (XLID) disorder, and both T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The PHF6 gene encodes a protein with two plant homeodomain (PHD)-like zinc finger domains. As many PHD-like domains function to target chromatin remodelers to post-translationally modified histones, this suggests a role for PHF6 in chromatin regulation. However, PHD domains are usually found in association with a catalytic domain, a feature that is lacking in PHF6. This distinct domain structure and the minimal information on its cellular function prompted us to perform a proteomic screen to identify PHF6 binding partners. We expressed recombinant Flag-tagged PHF6 in HEK 293T cells for coimmunoprecipitation, and analyzed the purified products by mass spectrometry. We identified proteins involved in ribosome biogenesis, RNA splicing, and chromatin regulation, consistent with PHF6 localization to both the nucleoplasm and nucleolus. Notably, PHF6 copurified with multiple constituents of the nucleosome remodeling and deacetylation (NuRD) complex, including CHD4, HDAC1, and RBBP4. We demonstrate that this PHF6-NuRD complex is not present in the nucleolus but is restricted to the nucleoplasm. The association with NuRD represents the first known interaction for PHF6 and implicates it in chromatin regulation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".