PCNA-binding activity separates RNF168 functions in DNA replication and DNA double-stranded break signaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNF168 orchestrates a ubiquitin-dependent DNA damage response to regulate the recruitment of repair factors, such as 53BP1 to DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). In addition to its canonical functions in DSB signaling, RNF168 may facilitate DNA replication fork progression. However, the precise role of RNF168 in DNA replication remains unclear. Here, we demonstrate that RNF168 is recruited to DNA replication factories in a manner that is independent of the canonical DSB response pathway regulated by Ataxia-Telangiectasia Mutated (ATM) and RNF8. We identify a degenerate Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen (PCNA)-interacting peptide (DPIP) motif in the C-terminus of RNF168, which together with its Motif Interacting with Ubiquitin (MIU) domain mediates binding to mono-ubiquitylated PCNA at replication factories. An RNF168 mutant harboring inactivating substitutions in its DPIP box and MIU1 domain (termed RNF168 ΔDPIP/ΔMIU1) is not recruited to sites of DNA synthesis and fails to support ongoing DNA replication. Notably, the PCNA interaction-deficient RNF168 ΔDPIP/ΔMIU1 mutant fully rescues the ability of RNF168-/- cells to form 53BP1 foci in response to DNA DSBs. Therefore, RNF168 functions in DNA replication and DSB signaling are fully separable. Our results define a new mechanism by which RNF168 promotes DNA replication independently of its canonical functions in DSB signaling.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".