Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14654683›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2003

HMG-D and histone H1 alter the local accessibility of nucleosomal DNA.

Anan Ragab, Andrew Travers

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Transient HMGB protein interactions with B-DNA duplexes and complexes.Biochemical and biophysical research communications · 2008
    Article
  18. HMGB binding to DNA: single and double box motifs.Journal of molecular biology · 2007
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anan RagabMRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Hills Road, Cambridge CB2 2QH, UK. ar298@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk
Andrew Travers
MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is evidence that HMGB proteins facilitate, while linker histones inhibit chromatin remodelling, respectively. We have examined the effects of HMG-D and histone H1/H5 on accessibility of nucleosomal DNA. Using the 601.2 nucleosome positioning sequence designed by Widom and colleagues we assembled nucleosomes in vitro and probed DNA accessibility with restriction enzymes in the presence or absence of HMG-D and histone H1/H5. For HMG-D our results show increased digestion at two spatially adjacent sites, the dyad and one terminus of nucleosomal DNA. Elsewhere varying degrees of protection from digestion were observed. The C-terminal acidic tail of HMG-D is essential for this pattern of accessibility. Neither the HMG domain by itself nor in combination with the adjacent basic region is sufficient. Histone H1/H5 binding produces two sites of increased digestion on opposite faces of the nucleosome and decreased digestion at all other sites. Our results provide the first evidence of local changes in the accessibility of nucleosomal DNA upon separate interaction with two linker binding proteins.

Indexed as

AnimalsChickensDNADNA Restriction EnzymesHigh Mobility Group ProteinsHistonesMutationNuclease Protection AssaysNucleosomesProtein BindingDNADNA Restriction Enzymeshigh mobility group protein DHigh Mobility Group ProteinsHistonesNucleosomes

Identifiers

PMID14654683
PMCPMC291865
OpenAlexW2031480063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.