Gfi1b negatively regulates <i>Rag</i> expression directly and via the repression of <i>FoxO1</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precise regulation of Rag (recombination-activating gene) expression is crucial to prevent genomic instability caused by the generation of Rag-mediated DNA breaks. Although mechanisms of Rag activation have been well characterized, the mechanism by which Rag expression is down-regulated in early B cell development has not been fully elucidated. Using a complementary DNA library screen, we identified the transcriptional repressor Gfi1b as negative regulator of the Rag locus. Expression of Gfi1b causes repression of Rag1 and Rag2 in cell lines and primary mouse cells. Conversely, Gfi1b-deficient cell lines exhibit increased Rag expression, double-strand breaks and recombination, and cell cycle defects. In primary cells, transcription of Gfi1b inversely correlates with Rag transcription, and simultaneous inactivation of Gfi1 and Gfi1b leads to an increase in Rag transcription early in B cell development. In addition, deletion of Gfi1 and Gfi1b in vivo results in a severe block in B cell development. Gfi1b orchestrates Rag repression via a dual mechanism. Direct binding of Gfi1b to a site 5' of the B cell-specific Erag enhancer results in epigenetic changes in the Rag locus, whereas indirect inhibition is achieved through repression of the trans-activator Foxo1. Together, our experiments show that Gfi family members are essential for normal B cell development and play an important role in modulating expression of the V(D)J recombinase.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".