Histone modifications influence mediator interactions with chromatin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Mediator complex transmits activation signals from DNA bound transcription factors to the core transcription machinery. Genome wide localization studies have demonstrated that Mediator occupancy not only correlates with high levels of transcription, but that the complex also is present at transcriptionally silenced locations. We provide evidence that Mediator localization is guided by an interaction with histone tails, and that this interaction is regulated by their post-translational modifications. A quantitative, high-density genetic interaction map revealed links between Mediator components and factors affecting chromatin structure, especially histone deacetylases. Peptide binding assays demonstrated that pure wild-type Mediator forms stable complexes with the tails of Histone H3 and H4. These binding assays also showed Mediator-histone H4 peptide interactions are specifically inhibited by acetylation of the histone H4 lysine 16, a residue critical in transcriptional silencing. Finally, these findings were validated by tiling array analysis that revealed a broad correlation between Mediator and nucleosome occupancy in vivo, but a negative correlation between Mediator and nucleosomes acetylated at histone H4 lysine 16. Our studies show that chromatin structure and the acetylation state of histones are intimately connected to Mediator localization.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".