Functional characterization of RebL1 highlights the evolutionary conservation of oncogenic activities of the RBBP4/7 orthologue in <i>Tetrahymena thermophila</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Retinoblastoma-binding proteins 4 and 7 (RBBP4 and RBBP7) are two highly homologous human histone chaperones. They function in epigenetic regulation as subunits of multiple chromatin-related complexes and have been implicated in numerous cancers. Due to their overlapping functions, our understanding of RBBP4 and 7, particularly outside of Opisthokonts, has remained limited. Here, we report that in the ciliate protozoan Tetrahymena thermophila a single orthologue of human RBBP4 and 7 proteins, RebL1, physically interacts with histone H4 and functions in multiple epigenetic regulatory pathways. Functional proteomics identified conserved functional links for Tetrahymena RebL1 protein as well as human RBBP4 and 7. We found that putative subunits of multiple chromatin-related complexes including CAF1, Hat1, Rpd3, and MuvB, co-purified with RebL1 during Tetrahymena growth and conjugation. Iterative proteomics analyses revealed that the cell cycle regulatory MuvB-complex in Tetrahymena is composed of at least five subunits including evolutionarily conserved Lin54, Lin9 and RebL1 proteins. Genome-wide analyses indicated that RebL1 and Lin54 (Anqa1) bind within genic and intergenic regions. Moreover, Anqa1 targets primarily promoter regions suggesting a role for Tetrahymena MuvB in transcription regulation. RebL1 depletion inhibited cellular growth and reduced the expression levels of Anqa1 and Lin9. Consistent with observations in glioblastoma tumors, RebL1 depletion suppressed DNA repair protein Rad51 in Tetrahymena, thus underscoring the evolutionarily conserved functions of RBBP4/7 proteins. Our results suggest the essentiality of RebL1 functions in multiple epigenetic regulatory complexes in which it impacts transcription regulation and cellular viability.
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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".