DNA Binding Specificity Studies of Four ETS Proteins Support an Indirect Read-out Mechanism of Protein-DNA Recognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of the ETS family of transcription factors are involved in several developmental and physiological processes, and, when overexpressed or misexpressed, can contribute to a variety of cancers. Each family member has a conserved DNA-binding domain that recognizes DNA sequences containing a G-G-A trinucleotide. Discrimination between potential ETS-binding sites appears to be governed by both the nucleotides flanking the G-G-A sequence and protein-protein interactions. We have used an adaptation of the "length-encoded multiplex" approach (Desjarlais, J. R., and Berg, J. M. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 11099-11103) to define DNA binding specificities for four ETS proteins: Fli-1, SAP-1, PU.1, and TEL. Our results support a model in which cooperative effects among neighboring bases flanking the central G-G-A site contribute to the formation of stable ETS/DNA complexes. These results are consistent with a mechanism for specific DNA binding that is partially governed by an indirect read-out of the DNA sequence, in which a sequence-specific DNA conformation is sensed or induced.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".