SUMO protease FUG1, histone reader AL3 and the PRC1 Complex are integral to repeat-expansion induced epigenetic silencing in <i>Arabidopsis thaliana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epigenetic gene silencing induced by expanded repeats can cause diverse phenotypes ranging from severe growth defects in plants to genetic diseases such as Friedreich’s ataxia in humans 1 . The molecular mechanisms underlying repeat expansion-induced epigenetic silencing remain largely unknown 2,3 . Using a plant model, we have previously shown that expanded repeats can induce smallRNAs which in turn can lead to epigenetic silencing through the RNA-dependent DNA methylation pathway 4,5 . Here, using a genetic suppressor screen, we confirm a key role for the RdDM pathway and identify novel components required for epigenetic silencing caused by expanded repeats. We show that FOURTH ULP LIKE GENE CLASS 1 (FUG1) – a SUMO protease, ALFIN-LIKE 3 – a histone reader and LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN 1 (LHP1) - a component of the PRC1 complex are required for repeat expansion-induced epigenetic silencing. Loss of any of these components suppress repeat expansion-associated phenotypes. SUMO protease FUG1 physically interacts with AL3 and perturbing its potential SUMOylation site disrupts its nuclear localisation. AL3 physically interacts with LHP1 of the PRC1 complex and the FUG1-AL3-LHP1 module is essential to confer repeat expansion-associated epigenetic silencing. Our findings highlight the importance post-translational modifiers and histone readers in epigenetic silencing caused by repeat expansions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".