MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051869227 · doi:10.1186/1471-2199-11-92

Rrd1 isomerizes RNA polymerase II in response to rapamycin

2010· article· en· W2051869227 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathalie Jouvet, Jérémie Poschmann, Julie Douville, Lisa Bulet, Dindial Ramotar

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Molecular Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRNA polymerase IIBiologyChromatinPolymeraseRNA polymerase ITranscription (linguistics)RNA polymeraseTranscription factor II DCell biologyMolecular biologyRNARNA-dependent RNA polymeraseBiochemistryGeneGene expressionPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the immunosuppressant rapamycin engenders a profound modification in the transcriptional profile leading to growth arrest. Mutants devoid of Rrd1, a protein possessing in vitro peptidyl prolyl cis/trans isomerase activity, display striking resistance to the drug, although how Rrd1 activity is linked to the biological responses has not been elucidated. RESULTS: We now provide evidence that Rrd1 is associated with the chromatin and it interacts with RNA polymerase II. Circular dichroism revealed that Rrd1 mediates structural changes onto the C-terminal domain (CTD) of the large subunit of RNA polymerase II (Rpb1) in response to rapamycin, although this appears to be independent of the overall phosphorylation status of the CTD. In vitro experiments, showed that recombinant Rrd1 directly isomerizes purified GST-CTD and that it releases RNA polymerase II from the chromatin. Consistent with this, we demonstrated that Rrd1 is required to alter RNA polymerase II occupancy on rapamycin responsive genes. CONCLUSION: We propose as a mechanism, that upon rapamycin exposure Rrd1 isomerizes Rpb1 to promote its dissociation from the chromatin in order to modulate transcription.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Molecular BiologySame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207