ArticleMolecular microbiology2011
Activator-independent transcription of Snf1-dependent genes in mutants lacking histone tails.
Article in Molecular microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Carbon source dependent promoters in yeasts.Microbial cell factories · 2014Review
- 14-3-3 (Bmh) proteins regulate combinatorial transcription following RNA polymerase II recruitment by binding at Adr1-dependent promoters in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.Molecular and cellular biology · 2013Article
- The AMP-activated protein kinase Snf1 regulates transcription factor binding, RNA polymerase II activity, and mRNA stability of glucose-repressed genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Transcriptional regulation of Snf1-dependent genes occurs in part by histone-acetylation-dependent binding of the transcription factor Adr1. Analysis of previously published microarray data indicated unscheduled transcription of a large number of Snf1- and Adr1-dependent genes when either the histone H3 or H4 tail was deleted. Quantitative real-time PCR confirmed that the tails were important to preserve stringent transcriptional repression of Snf1-dependent genes when glucose was present. The absence of the tails allowed Adr1 and RNA Polymerase II to bind promoters in normally inhibitory conditions. The promoters escaped glucose repression to a limited extent and the weak constitutive ADH2 transcription induced by deletion of the histone tails was transcription factor- and Snf1-independent. These effects were apparently due to a permissive chromatin structure that allowed transcription in the absence of repression mediated by the histone tails. Deleting REG1, and thus activating Snf1 in the H3 tail mutant enhanced transcription in repressing conditions, indicating that Snf1 and the H3 tail influence transcription independently. Deleting REG1 in the histone H4 tail mutant appeared to be lethal, even in the absence of Snf1, suggesting that Reg1 and the H4 tail have redundant functions that are important for cell viability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.