Genome-wide analysis of DWD proteins in soybean (Glycine max): Significance of Gm08DWD and GmMYB176 interaction in isoflavonoid biosynthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A subset of WD40 proteins with DWD motif has been proposed to serve as substrate receptor of DDB-CUL4-ROC1 complex, thereby getting involved in protein degradation via ubiquitination pathway. Here, we identified a total of 161 potential DWD proteins in soybean (Glycine max) by searching DWD motif against the genome-wide WD40 repeats, and classified them into 20 groups on the basis of their functional domains and annotations. These putative DWD genes in soybean displayed tissue-specific expression patterns, and their genome localization and analysis of evolutionary relationship identified 48 duplicated gene pairs within 161 GmDWDs. Among the 161 soybean DWD proteins, Gm08DWD was previously found to interact with an isoflavonoid regulator, GmMYB176. Therefore, Gm08DWD and its homologue Gm05DWD were further investigated. Expression profile of both genes in different soybean tissues revealed that Gm08DWD was expressed higher in embryo, while Gm05DWD exhibited maximum transcript accumulation in leaf. Our protein-protein interaction studies demonstrated that Gm08DWD interacts with GmMYB176. Although Gm08DWD was localized both in nucleus and cytoplasm, the resulting complex of Gm08DWD and GmMYB176 was mainly observed in the nucleus. This finding is consistent with the functional localization of CUL4-E3 ligase complex. In conclusion, the survey on soybean potential DWD protein is useful reference for the further functional investigation of their DDB1-binding ability. Based on the functional investigation of Gm08DWD, we speculate that protein-protein interaction between Gm08DWD and GmMYB176 may lead to the degradation of GmMYB176 through CUL4-DDB1complex.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".