The plasticity of WDR5 peptide-binding cleft enables the binding of the SET1 family of histone methyltransferases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In mammals, the SET1 family of lysine methyltransferases (KMTs), which includes MLL1-5, SET1A and SET1B, catalyzes the methylation of lysine-4 (Lys-4) on histone H3. Recent reports have demonstrated that a three-subunit complex composed of WD-repeat protein-5 (WDR5), retinoblastoma-binding protein-5 (RbBP5) and absent, small, homeotic disks-2-like (ASH2L) stimulates the methyltransferase activity of MLL1. On the basis of studies showing that this stimulation is in part controlled by an interaction between WDR5 and a small region located in close proximity of the MLL1 catalytic domain [referred to as the WDR5-interacting motif (Win)], it has been suggested that WDR5 might play an analogous role in scaffolding the other SET1 complexes. We herein provide biochemical and structural evidence showing that WDR5 binds the Win motifs of MLL2-4, SET1A and SET1B. Comparative analysis of WDR5-Win complexes reveals that binding of the Win motifs is achieved by the plasticity of WDR5 peptidyl-arginine-binding cleft allowing the C-terminal ends of the Win motifs to be maintained in structurally divergent conformations. Consistently, enzymatic assays reveal that WDR5 plays an important role in the optimal stimulation of MLL2-4, SET1A and SET1B methyltransferase activity by the RbBP5-ASH2L heterodimer. Overall, our findings illustrate the function of WDR5 in scaffolding the SET1 family of KMTs and further emphasize on the important role of WDR5 in regulating global histone H3 Lys-4 methylation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".