Development of an in Vitro Assay for the Proteolytic Processing of the CDP/Cux Transcription Factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The CDP/Cux transcription factor was previously shown to be proteolytically processed at the G1/S transition. In view of characterizing and eventually identifying the protease responsible for CDP/Cux processing, we have established an in vitro proteolytic processing assay. CDP/Cux recombinant proteins expressed in mammalian or bacterial cells were efficiently processed in vitro using as a source of protease either whole cell extracts, the nuclear or the cytoplasmic fraction. Processing was found to take place optimally at a lower pH, to be insensitive to variations in salt concentration, and to be inhibited by the protease inhibitors MG132 and E64D. Interestingly, the bacterially-produced substrate was more efficiently processed than the substrate purified from mammalian cells. Moreover, processing in vitro was more efficient when CDP/Cux substrates were purified from populations of cells enriched in the S phase than in the G1 phase of the cell cycle. Altogether, these results suggest that posttranslational modifications of CDP/Cux in mammalian cells inhibits processing and contributes to the cell cycle-dependent regulation of processing. The in vitro processing assay described in this study will provide a useful tool for the purification and identification of the protease responsible for the processing of CDP/Cux.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".