Mechanisms orchestrating the enzymatic activity and cellular functions of deubiquitinases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deubiquitinases (DUBs) are required for the reverse reaction of ubiquitination and act as major regulators of ubiquitin signaling processes. Emerging evidence suggests that these enzymes are regulated at multiple levels in order to ensure proper and timely substrate targeting and to prevent the adverse consequences of promiscuous deubiquitination. The importance of DUB regulation is highlighted by disease-associated mutations that inhibit or activate DUBs, deregulating their ability to coordinate cellular processes. Here, we describe the diverse mechanisms governing protein stability, enzymatic activity, and function of DUBs. In particular, we outline how DUBs are regulated by their protein domains and interacting partners. Intramolecular interactions can promote protein stability of DUBs, influence their subcellular localization, and/or modulate their enzymatic activity. Remarkably, these intramolecular interactions can induce self-deubiquitination to counteract DUB ubiquitination by cognate E3 ubiquitin ligases. In addition to intramolecular interactions, DUBs can also oligomerize and interact with a wide variety of cellular proteins, thereby forming obligate or facultative complexes that regulate their enzymatic activity and function. The importance of signaling and post-translational modifications in the integrated control of DUB function will also be discussed. While several DUBs are described with respect to the multiple layers of their regulation, the tumor suppressor BAP1 will be outlined as a model enzyme whose localization, stability, enzymatic activity, and substrate recognition are highly orchestrated by interacting partners and post-translational modifications.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".