Cell Signaling Switches HOX-PBX Complexes from Repressors to Activators of Transcription Mediated by Histone Deacetylases and Histone Acetyltransferases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Hoxb1 autoregulatory element comprises three HOX-PBX binding sites. Despite the presence of HOXB1 and PBX1, this enhancer fails to activate reporter gene expression in retinoic acid-treated P19 cell monolayers. Activation requires cell aggregation in addition to RA. This suggests that HOX-PBX complexes may repress transcription under some conditions. Consistent with this, multimerized HOX-PBX binding sites repress reporter gene expression in HEK293 cells. We provide a mechanistic basis for repressor function by demonstrating that a corepressor complex, including histone deacetylases (HDACs) 1 and 3, mSIN3B, and N-CoR/SMRT, interacts with PBX1A. We map a site of interaction with HDAC1 to the PBX1 N terminus and show that the PBX partner is required for repression by the HOX-PBX complex. Treatment with the deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A not only relieves repression but also converts the HOX-PBX complex to a net activator of transcription. We show that this activation function is mediated by the recruitment of the coactivator CREB-binding protein by the HOX partner. Interestingly, HOX-PBX complexes are switched from transcriptional repressors to activators in response to protein kinase A signaling or cell aggregation. Together, our results suggest a model whereby the HOX-PBX complex can act as a repressor or activator of transcription via association with corepressors and coactivators. The model implies that cell signaling is a direct determinant of HOX-PBX function in the patterning of the animal embryo.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".