Molecular Insights into the Function of RING Finger (RNF)-containing Proteins hRNF8 and hRNF168 in Ubc13/Mms2-dependent Ubiquitylation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The repair of DNA double strand breaks by homologous recombination relies on the unique topology of the chains formed by Lys-63 ubiquitylation of chromatin to recruit repair factors such as breast cancer 1 (BRCA1) to sites of DNA damage. The human RING finger (RNF) E3 ubiquitin ligases, RNF8 and RNF168, with the E2 ubiquitin-conjugating complex Ubc13/Mms2, perform the majority of Lys-63 ubiquitylation in homologous recombination. Here, we show that RNF8 dimerizes and binds to Ubc13/Mms2, thereby stimulating formation of Lys-63 ubiquitin chains, whereas the related RNF168 RING domain is a monomer and does not catalyze Lys-63 polyubiquitylation. The crystal structure of the RNF8/Ubc13/Mms2 ternary complex reveals the structural basis for the interaction between Ubc13 and the RNF8 RING and that an extended RNF8 coiled-coil is responsible for its dimerization. Mutations that disrupt the RNF8/Ubc13 binding surfaces, or that truncate the RNF8 coiled-coil, reduce RNF8-catalyzed ubiquitylation. These findings support the hypothesis that RNF8 is responsible for the initiation of Lys-63-linked ubiquitylation in the DNA damage response, which is subsequently amplified by RNF168. Background: RNF8 and RNF168 are essential RING-E3 ubiquitin ligases that catalyze the formation of Lys-63 ubiquitin chains in the DNA damage response (DDR). Results: We solved the crystal structures and probed the activity of RNF8 and RNF168 in vitro . Conclusion: RNF168 likely acts downstream of RNF8 given its deficient activity. Significance: Our data provide structural and catalytic insight into the relative activities of RNF8 and RNF168.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".