Pulse-SILAC and Interactomics Reveal Distinct DDB1-CUL4–Associated Factors, Cellular Functions, and Protein Substrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cullin-RING finger ligases represent the largest family of ubiquitin ligases. They are responsible for the ubiquitination of ∼20% of cellular proteins degraded through the proteasome, by catalyzing the transfer of E2-loaded ubiquitin to a substrate. Seven cullins are described in vertebrates. Among them, cullin 4 (CUL4) associates with DNA damage-binding protein 1 (DDB1) to form the CUL4-DDB1 ubiquitin ligase complex, which is involved in protein ubiquitination and in the regulation of many cellular processes. Substrate recognition adaptors named DDB1/CUL4-associated factors (DCAFs) mediate the specificity of CUL4-DDB1 and have a short structural motif of approximately forty amino acids terminating in tryptophan (W)-aspartic acid (D) dipeptide, called the WD40 domain. Using different approaches (bioinformatics/structural analyses), independent studies suggested that at least sixty WD40-containing proteins could act as adaptors for the DDB1/CUL4 complex. To better define this association and classification, the interaction of each DCAFs with DDB1 was determined, and new partners and potential substrates were identified. Using BioID and affinity purification-mass spectrometry approaches, we demonstrated that seven WD40 proteins can be considered DCAFs with a high confidence level. Identifying protein interactions does not always lead to identifying protein substrates for E3-ubiquitin ligases, so we measured changes in protein stability or degradation by pulse-stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture to identify changes in protein degradation, following the expression of each DCAF. In conclusion, these results provide new insights into the roles of DCAFs in regulating the activity of the DDB1-CUL4 complex, in protein targeting, and characterized the cellular processes involved.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".