Combgap contributes to recruitment of Polycomb group proteins in <i>Drosophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polycomb group (PcG) proteins are responsible for maintaining the silenced transcriptional state of many developmentally regulated genes. PcG proteins are organized into multiprotein complexes that are recruited to DNA via cis-acting elements known as "Polycomb response elements" (PREs). In Drosophila, PREs consist of binding sites for many different DNA-binding proteins, some known and others unknown. Identification of these DNA-binding proteins is crucial to understanding the mechanism of PcG recruitment to PREs. We report here the identification of Combgap (Cg), a sequence-specific DNA-binding protein that is involved in recruitment of PcG proteins. Cg can bind directly to PREs via GTGT motifs and colocalizes with the PcG proteins Pleiohomeotic (Pho) and Polyhomeotic (Ph) at the majority of PREs in the genome. In addition, Cg colocalizes with Ph at a number of targets independent of Pho. Loss of Cg leads to decreased recruitment of Ph at only a subset of sites; some of these sites are binding sites for other Polycomb repressive complex 1 (PRC1) components, others are not. Our data suggest that Cg can recruit Ph in the absence of PRC1 and illustrate the diversity and redundancy of PcG protein recruitment mechanisms.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".