Histone Recycling by FACT and Spt6 during Transcription Prevents the Scrambling of Histone Modifications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genomic DNA is framed by additional layers of information, referred to as the epigenome. Epigenomic marks such as DNA methylation, histone modifications, and histone variants are concentrated on specific genomic sites, where they can both instruct and reflect gene expression. How this information is maintained, notably in the face of transcription, is not completely understood. Specifically, the extent to which modified histones themselves are retained through RNA polymerase II passage is unclear. Here, we show that several histone modifications are mislocalized when the transcription-coupled histone chaperones FACT or Spt6 are disrupted in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. In the absence of functional FACT or Spt6, transcription generates nucleosome loss, which is partially compensated for by the increased activity of non-transcription-coupled histone chaperones. The random incorporation of transcription-evicted modified histones scrambles epigenomic information. Our work highlights the importance of local recycling of modified histones by FACT and Spt6 during transcription in the maintenance of the epigenomic landscape.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".