MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3138302026 · doi:10.1101/2021.03.17.435897

A Degenerate PCNA-Interacting Peptide (DPIP) box targets RNF168 to replicating DNA to limit 53BP1 signaling

2021· preprint· en· W3138302026 on OpenAlexafffund
Yang Yang, Deepika Jayaprakash, Robert M. Hollingworth, Steve Chen, Amy E. Jablonski, Yanzhe Gao, Jay Ramanlal Anand, Elizabeth Mutter‐Rottmayer, Jing An, Xing Cheng, Kenneth H. Pearce, Sophie-Anne Blanchet, Amélie Fradet‐Turcotte, Grant S. Stewart, Cyrus Vaziri

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsProliferating cell nuclear antigenUbiquitinDNA damageDNA repairDNA replicationReplisomeCell biologyBiologyUbiquitin ligaseDNAMolecular biologyGeneticsEukaryotic DNA replicationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The E3 ligase RNF168 has been suggested to have roles at DNA replication forks in addition to its canonical functions in DNA double-strand break (DSB) signaling. However, the precise role of RNF168 in DNA replication remains unclear. Here we demonstrate that RNF168 is recruited to DNA replication factories independent of the canonical DSB response pathway regulators and identify a degenerate PCNA-Interacting Peptide (DPIP) motif in the C-terminus of RNF168 which mediates its binding to PCNA. An RNF168 mutant harboring substitutions in the DPIP box fails to interact with PCNA and is not recruited to sites of DNA synthesis, yet fully retains its ability to promote DSB-induced 53BP1 foci. Surprisingly, the RNF168 DPIP mutant also retains the ability to support ongoing DNA replication fork movement, demonstrating that PCNA-binding is dispensable for normal S-phase functions. However, replisome-associated RNF168 functions to suppress the DSB-induced 53BP1 DNA damage response during S-phase. Moreover, we show that WT RNF168 can perform PCNA ubiquitylation independently of RAD18 and also synergizes with RAD18 to amplify PCNA ubiquitylation. Taken together, our results identify non-canonical functions of RNF168 at the replication fork and demonstrate new mechanisms of cross talk between the DNA damage and replication stress response pathways.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicDNA Repair Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→