MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2627008401 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-04194-7

Basic surface features of nuclear FKBPs facilitate chromatin binding

2017· article· en· W2627008401 on OpenAlexafffund
Chi-Sing Leung, Francy-Pesek Jardim, Neda Savic, Yoan R. Monneau, Rodrigo González‐Romero, Geoff Gudavicius, José M. Eirín‐López, Till Bartke, Cameron D. Mackereth, Juan Ausió, Christopher J. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSignaling Pathways in Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFlorida International University
KeywordsChromatinComputational biologyComputer scienceData scienceBioinformaticsChemistryBiologyDNABiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nucleoplasmin family of histone chaperones is identified by a pentamer-forming domain and multiple acidic tracts that mediate histone binding and chaperone activity. Within this family, a novel domain organization was recently discovered that consists of an N-terminal nucleoplasmin-like (NPL) domain and a C-terminal FKBP peptidyl-proline isomerase domain. Saccharomyces cerevisiae Fpr4 is one such protein. Here we report that in addition to its known histone prolyl isomerase activities, the Fpr4 FKBP domain binds to nucleosomes and nucleosome arrays in vitro. This ability is mediated by a collection of basic patches that enable the enzyme to stably associate with linker DNA. The interaction of the Fpr4 FKBP with recombinant chromatin complexes condenses nucleosome arrays independently of its catalytic activity. Based on phylogenetic comparisons we propose that the chromatin binding ability of 'basic' FKBPs is shared amongst related orthologues present in fungi, plants, and insects. Thus, a subclass of FKBP prolyl isomerase enzymes is recruited to linker regions of chromatin.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations27
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicSignaling Pathways in DiseaseFrench-language works237,207