Endoplasmic Reticulum-Associated Secretory Proteins Sec20p, Sec39p, and Dsl1p Are Involved in Peroxisome Biogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two pathways have been identified for peroxisome formation: (i) growth and division and (ii) de novo synthesis. Recent experiments determined that peroxisomes originate at the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Although many proteins have been implicated in the peroxisome biogenic program, no proteins in the eukaryotic secretory pathway have been identified as having roles in peroxisome formation. Using the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae regulatable Tet promoter Hughes clone collection, we found that repression of the ER-associated secretory proteins Sec20p and Sec39p resulted in mislocalization of the peroxisomal matrix protein chimera Pot1p-green fluorescent protein (GFP) to the cytosol. Likewise, the peroxisomal membrane protein chimera Pex3p-GFP localized to tubular-vesicular structures in cells suppressed for Sec20p, Sec39p, and Dsl1p, which form a complex at the ER. Loss of Sec39p attenuated formation of Pex3p-derived peroxisomal structures following galactose induction of Pex3p-GFP expression from the GAL1 promoter. Expression of Sec20p, Sec39p, and Dsl1p was moderately increased in yeast grown under conditions that proliferate peroxisomes, and Sec20p, Sec39p, and Dsl1p were found to cofractionate with peroxisomes and colocalize with Pex3p-monomeric red fluorescent protein under these conditions. Our results show that SEC20, SEC39, and DSL1 are essential secretory genes involved in the early stages of peroxisome assembly, and this work is the first to identify and characterize an ER-associated secretory machinery involved in peroxisome biogenesis.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".