MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172187729 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1114117109

Structural basis for substrate specificity and catalysis of human histone acetyltransferase 1

2012· article· en· W2172187729 on OpenAlexafffund
Hong Wu, Natasha Moshkina, Jinrong Min, Hong Zeng, Jennifer Joshua, Ming‐Ming Zhou, A.N. Plotnikov

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsStructural Genomics ConsortiumUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWellcome Trust
KeywordsHistone acetyltransferaseHistone H4BiochemistryHistone H1HistoneHistone octamerHistone methyltransferaseAcetylationChemistryHistone H2ABiologyLysineAmino acidNucleosomeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Histone acetyltransferase 1 is the founding member of the histone acetyltransferase superfamily and catalyzes lysine acetylation of newly synthesized histone H4. Here we report a 1.9-Å resolution crystal structure of human histone acetyltransferase 1 in complex with acetyl coenzyme A and histone H4 peptide. The crystal structure reveals that the cofactor and the side chain of lysine 12 of histone H4 peptide are placed in the canyon between the central and C-terminal domains. Histone H4 peptide adopts a well-defined conformation and establishes an extensive set of interactions with the enzyme including invariant residues Glu64 and Trp199, which together govern substrate-binding specificity of histone acetyltransferase 1. Our structure-guided enzyme kinetic study further demonstrates a cumulative effect of the active-site residues Glu187, Glu276, and Asp277 on deprotonation of the ε-amino group of reactive Lys12 for direct attack of the acetyl group of the cofactor.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207