Molecular basis for the role of GATA transcription factors in cardiomyocytes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of the GATA family of transcription factors are evolutionary conserved DNA-binding proteins that play critical roles in cell differentiation. They share a highly conserved zinc finger domain responsible for specific binding to a consensus (A/T)GATA(A/G) sequence. Three GATA factors, GATA-4, GATA-5, and GATA-6, are expressed in the heart and two of them, GATA-4 and GATA-6, are coexpressed in cardiomyocytes. Given the early embryonic lethality of GATA-4 and GATA-6 null mice, their exact role in cardiomyocytes was unclear. The objective of my doctoral work was to elucidate the role of GATA-4 and GATA-6 in postnatal cardiomyocytes and the molecular basis for their specificity. Since the identification of GATA-4 and GATA-6 target genes would help to elucidate their functions, we inhibited GATA-4 and GATA-6 protein production in postnatal cardiomyocytes and assessed its effect on cardiac gene expression. The results demonstrated that GATA-4 and GATA-6 are required for the maintenance of cardiac gene expression. Importantly, the work showed that GATA-4 and GATA-6 differentially regulate target genes and that this specificity is due, at least in part, to their differential DNA-binding affinity. In addition to differential DNA-binding affinity, we showed that GATA factors also acquire specificity by differential interaction with cofactors, such as MEF2 and Nkx2-5. Thus, GATA factor specificity is achieved at three levels: differential spatio-temporal expression, differential DNA-binding affinity, and differential interaction with cofactors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".