Dynamic regulation of histone H3K9 is linked to the switch between replication and transcription at the Dbf4 origin-promoter locus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The co-regulation of DNA replication and gene transcription is still poorly understood. To gain a better understanding of this important control mechanism, we examined the DNA replication and transcription using the Dbf4 origin-promoter and Dbf4 pseudogene models. We found that origin firing and Dbf4 transcription activity were inversely regulated in a cell cycle-dependent manner. We also found that proteins critical for the regulation of replication (ORC, MCM), transcription (SP1, TFIIB), and cohesin (Smc1, Smc3) and Mediator functions (Med1, Med12) interact with specific sites within and the surrounding regions of the Dbf4 locus in a cell cycle-dependent manner. As expected, replication initiation occurred within a nucleosome-depleted region, and nucleosomes flanked the 2 replication initiation zones. Further, the histone H3 in this region was distinctly acetylated or trimethylated on lysine 9 in a cell cycle-dependent fluctuation pattern: H3K9ac was most prevalent when the Dbf4 transcription level was highest whereas the H3K9me3 level was greatest during and just after replication. The KDM4A histone demethylase, which is responsible for the H3K9me3 modification, was enriched at the Dbf4 origin in a manner coinciding with H3K9me3. Finally, HP1γ, a protein known to interact with H3K9me3 in the heterochromatin was also found enriched at the origin during DNA replication, indicating that H3K9me3 may be required for the regulation of replication at both heterochromatin and euchromatin regions. Taken together, our data show that mammalian cells employ an extremely sophisticated and multilayered co-regulation mechanism for replication and transcription in a highly coordinated manner.
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".