Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25121932›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2014

Conditional inactivation of Upstream Binding Factor reveals its epigenetic functions and the existence of a somatic nucleolar precursor body.

Nourdine Hamdane, Victor Y Stefanovsky, Michel G Tremblay, Attila Németh, Eric Paquet, Frédéric Lessard, Elaine Sanij, Ross Hannan, Tom Moss

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Modification of the Transcription Factor FOXL2 at Serines 101 and 107 Disables DNA Binding, Leads to Nucleolar Relocalization, and Rewires Granulosa-Cell Programs.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Nourdine HamdaneLaboratory of Growth and Development, St-Patrick Research Group in Basic Oncology, Cancer Division of the Quebec University Hospital Research Centre, Edifice St Patrick, Québec, Québec, Canada; Department of Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Victor Y StefanovskyLaboratory of Growth and Development, St-Patrick Research Group in Basic Oncology, Cancer Division of the Quebec University Hospital Research Centre, Edifice St Patrick, Québec, Québec, Canada; Department of Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Michel G TremblayLaboratory of Growth and Development, St-Patrick Research Group in Basic Oncology, Cancer Division of the Quebec University Hospital Research Centre, Edifice St Patrick, Québec, Québec, Canada; Department of Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Attila NémethDepartment of Biochemistry III, Biochemistry Center Regensburg, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Eric PaquetLaboratory of Growth and Development, St-Patrick Research Group in Basic Oncology, Cancer Division of the Quebec University Hospital Research Centre, Edifice St Patrick, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Frédéric LessardLaboratory of Growth and Development, St-Patrick Research Group in Basic Oncology, Cancer Division of the Quebec University Hospital Research Centre, Edifice St Patrick, Québec, Québec, Canada; Department of Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Elaine SanijSir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Research Division, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Ross HannanSir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia; Research Division, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Tom MossLaboratory of Growth and Development, St-Patrick Research Group in Basic Oncology, Cancer Division of the Quebec University Hospital Research Centre, Edifice St Patrick, Québec, Québec, Canada; Department of Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Laval University, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Université Laval · CAPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Regensburg · DE

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research MOP12205
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Upstream Binding Factor (UBF) is a unique multi-HMGB-box protein first identified as a co-factor in RNA polymerase I (RPI/PolI) transcription. However, its poor DNA sequence selectivity and its ability to generate nucleosome-like nucleoprotein complexes suggest a more generalized role in chromatin structure. We previously showed that extensive depletion of UBF reduced the number of actively transcribed ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes, but had little effect on rRNA synthesis rates or cell proliferation, leaving open the question of its requirement for RPI transcription. Using gene deletion in mouse, we now show that UBF is essential for embryo development beyond morula. Conditional deletion in cell cultures reveals that UBF is also essential for transcription of the rRNA genes and that it defines the active chromatin conformation of both gene and enhancer sequences. Loss of UBF prevents formation of the SL1/TIF1B pre-initiation complex and recruitment of the RPI-Rrn3/TIF1A complex. It is also accompanied by recruitment of H3K9me3, canonical histone H1 and HP1α, but not by de novo DNA methylation. Further, genes retain penta-acetyl H4 and H2A.Z, suggesting that even in the absence of UBF the rRNA genes can maintain a potentially active state. In contrast to canonical histone H1, binding of H1.4 is dependent on UBF, strongly suggesting that it plays a positive role in gene activity. Unexpectedly, arrest of rRNA synthesis does not suppress transcription of the 5S, tRNA or snRNA genes, nor expression of the several hundred mRNA genes implicated in ribosome biogenesis. Thus, rRNA gene activity does not coordinate global gene expression for ribosome biogenesis. Loss of UBF also unexpectedly induced the formation in cells of a large sub-nuclear structure resembling the nucleolar precursor body (NPB) of oocytes and early embryos. These somatic NPBs contain rRNA synthesis and processing factors but do not associate with the rRNA gene loci (NORs).

Indexed as

Epigenesis, GeneticTranscription, GeneticAnimalsCell NucleolusChromatinDNA MethylationGene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalHistonesHMGB ProteinsMiceOocytesPol1 Transcription Initiation Complex ProteinsRibosomesRNA Polymerase IRNA, RibosomalChromatinHistonesHMGB ProteinsPol1 Transcription Initiation Complex ProteinsRNA Polymerase IRNA, Ribosomaltranscription factor UBF

Identifiers

PMID25121932
PMCPMC4133168
OpenAlexW1970540591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.