Characterization of major chromatin assembly proteins in tetrahymena thermophile using proeomic and molecular evolutionary analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Histones H3/H4 are deposited onto DNA in a replication-dependent or independent fashion by the CAF1 and HIRA protein complexes. Despite the identification of these protein complexes, mechanistic details remain unclear. Recently, we showed that in T. thermophila histone chaperones Nrp1, Asf1 and the Impβ6 importin function together to transport newly synthesized H3/H4 from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. To characterize chromatin assembly proteins in T.thermophila, I used affinity purification combined with mass spectrometry to identify protein-protein interactions of Nrp1, Cac2 subunit of CAF1, HIRA and histone modifying Hat1-complex in T. thermophila. I found that the three-subunit T.thermophila CAF1 complex interacts with Casein Kinase 2 (CKII), possibly accounting for previously reported human CAF1phosphorylation. I also found that Hat2 subunit of HAT1 complex is also shared by CAF1 complex as its Cac3 subunit. This suggests that Hat2/Cac3 might exist in two separate pools of protein complexes. Remarkably, proteomic analysis of Hat2/Cac3 in turn revealed that it forms several complexes with other proteins including SIN3, RXT3, LIN9 and TESMIN, all of which have known roles in the regulation of gene expression. Finally, I asked how selective forces might have impacted on the function of proteins involved in H3/H4 transport. Focusing on NASP which possesses several TPR motifs, I showed that its protein-protein interactions are conserved in T. thermophila. Using molecular evolutionary methods I show that different TPRs in NASP evolve at different rates possibly accounting for the functional diversity observed among different family members.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".