New insights into the mechanism and DNA-sequence specificity of INO80 chromatin remodeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The INO80 complex stood out in a large family of ATP-dependent chromatin remodelers because of its ATPase domain binding and translocating on DNA at the edge of nucleosomes, rather than at two helical turns from the center of DNA that is wrapped around nucleosomes. This unique property of INO80 was thought to account for its singular role in nucleosome placement at gene promoters in a DNA-sequence dependent manner that is crucial for transcription regulation. Now, we uncover INO80 functions differently than previously thought with its ATPase domain translocating on DNA close to the center of nucleosomes, like other remodelers. Our discovery also reveals the physical properties of the first ~36 bp of DNA on the entry side of nucleosomes is the main determinant for the DNA specificity of INO80 rather than the properties of the extranucleosomal DNA. The DNA sequence sensitive step of INO80 is after DNA is displaced from the histone octamer on the entry side of nucleosomes and 20 bp of DNA are moved out the exit side. We find the ATPase domain and Arp5 subunit of INO80 are likely involved in INO80's DNA specificity and the mechanism of INO80 remodeling is substantially different than originally proposed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".