MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396901149 · doi:10.1101/2024.05.13.593962

Differential roles of putative arginine fingers of AAA <sup>+</sup> ATPases Rvb1 and Rvb2

2024· preprint· en· W4396901149 on OpenAlexafffund
Jennifer L Warnock, Jacob A Ball, Saman M. Najmi, M. Henes, Amanda Vazquez, Sohail Koshnevis, Hans‐Joachim Wieden, Graeme L. Conn, Homa Ghalei

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersOffice of Advanced CyberinfrastructureUniversity of TorontoEmory UniversityNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiogenesisAAA proteinsBiologyATP hydrolysisATPaseArginineBinding siteCell biologyChromatin remodelingComputational biologyBiochemistryChromatinAmino acidDNAEnzymeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The evolutionarily conserved AAA + ATPases Rvb1 and Rvb2 proteins form a heteromeric complex (Rvb1/2) required for assembly or remodeling of macromolecular complexes in essential cellular processes ranging from chromatin remodeling to ribosome biogenesis. Rvb1 and Rvb2 have a high degree of sequence and structural similarity, and both contain the classical features of ATPases of their clade, including an N-terminal AAA + subdomain with the Walker A motif, an insertion domain that typically interacts with various binding partners, and a C-terminal AAA + subdomain containing a Walker B motif, the Sensor I and II motifs, and an arginine finger. In this study, we find that despite the high degree of structural similarity, Rvb1 and Rvb2 have distinct active sites that impact their activities and regulation within the Rvb1/2 complex. Using a combination of biochemical and genetic approaches, we show that replacing the homologous arginine fingers of Rvb1 and Rvb2 with different amino acids not only has distinct effects on the catalytic activity of the complex, but also impacts cell growth, and the Rvb1/2 interactions with binding partners. Using molecular dynamics simulations, we find that changes near the active site of Rvb1 and Rvb2 cause long-range effects on the protein dynamics in the insertion domain, suggesting a molecular basis for how enzymatic activity within the catalytic site of ATP hydrolysis can be relayed to other domains of the Rvb1/2 complex to modulate its function. Further, we show the impact that the arginine finger variants have on snoRNP biogenesis and validate the findings from molecular dynamics simulations using a targeted genetic screen. Together, our results reveal new aspects of the regulation of the Rvb1/2 complex by identifying a relay of long-range molecular communication from the ATPase active site of the complex to the binding site of cofactors. Most importantly, our findings suggest that despite high similarity and cooperation within the same protein complex, the two proteins have evolved with unique properties critical for the regulation and function of the Rvb1/2 complex. Significance AAA ATPases constitute a large family of proteins involved in various essential cellular functions in living organisms in all kingdoms of life. Members of this family typically form homo or hetero multimers that convert the energy from ATP hydrolysis to mechanical work. How the conserved features of AAA ATPases relay the energy from ATP hydrolysis to other functional domains of the complex remains largely unknown. Here, using arginine finger variants of Rvb1 and Rvb2, two evolutionarily conserved closely related AAA + ATPases that form a heterohexameric complex, we reveal how individual protomers in a heteromeric complex can uniquely contribute to the overall function of the complex and how changes in the ATP binding site can be relayed to distal functional domains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicRNA Research and Splicing→French-language works237,207→