Distinct surfaces on Cdc5/PLK Polo-box domain orchestrate combinatorial substrate recognition during cell division
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polo-like kinases (Plks) are key cell cycle regulators. They contain a kinase domain followed by a polo-box domain that recognizes phosphorylated substrates and enhances their phosphorylation. The regulatory subunit of the Dbf4-dependent kinase complex interacts with the polo-box domain of Cdc5 (the sole Plk in Saccharomyces cerevisiae) in a phosphorylation-independent manner. We have solved the crystal structures of the polo-box domain of Cdc5 on its own and in the presence of peptides derived from Dbf4 and a canonical phosphorylated substrate. The structure bound to the Dbf4-peptide reveals an additional density on the surface opposite to the phospho-peptide binding site that allowed us to propose a model for the interaction. We found that the two peptides can bind simultaneously and non-competitively to the polo-box domain in solution. Furthermore, point mutations on the surface opposite to the phosphopeptide binding site of the polo-box domain disrupt the interaction with the Dbf4 peptide in solution and cause an early anaphase arrest phenotype distinct from the mitotic exit defect typically observed in cdc5 mutants. Collectively, our data illustrates the importance of non-canonical interactions mediated by the polo-box domain and provide key mechanistic insights into the combinatorial recognition of substrates by Polo-like kinases.
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 | 0.000 |
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".