The Anaphase Promoting Complex Regulates Yeast Lifespan and rDNA Stability by Targeting Fob1 for Degradation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genomic stability, stress response, and nutrient signaling all play critical, evolutionarily conserved roles in lifespan determination. However, the molecular mechanisms coordinating these processes with longevity remain unresolved. Here we investigate the involvement of the yeast anaphase promoting complex (APC) in longevity. The APC governs passage through M and G1 via ubiquitin-dependent targeting of substrate proteins and is associated with cancer and premature aging when defective. Our two-hybrid screen utilizing Apc5 as bait recovered the lifespan determinant Fob1 as prey. Fob1 is unstable specifically in G1, cycles throughout the cell cycle in a manner similar to Clb2 (an APC target), and is stabilized in APC (apc5(CA)) and proteasome (rpn10) mutants. Deletion of FOB1 increased replicative lifespan (RLS) in wild type (WT), apc5(CA), and apc10 cells, and suppressed apc5(CA) cell cycle progression and rDNA recombination defects. Alternatively, increased FOB1 expression decreased RLS in WT cells, but did not reduce the already short apc5(CA) RLS, suggesting an epistatic interaction between apc5(CA) and fob1. Mutation to a putative L-Box (Fob1(E420V)), a Destruction Box-like motif, abolished Fob1 modifications, stabilized the protein, and increased rDNA recombination. Our work provides a mechanistic role played by the APC to promote replicative longevity and genomic stability in yeast.
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".