ArticleNature communications2024
Variation of C-terminal domain governs RNA polymerase II genomic locations and alternative splicing in eukaryotic transcription.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- How do low-complexity domain interactions control transcription?Biochemical Society transactions · 2026Review
- Communication is key: combinatorial phosphorylation and functional cross-talk in the RNA polymerase II CTD code.Biochemical Society transactions · 2026Review
- Multisite Threonine Phosphorylation in the SPT5 C-Terminal Region 1 Enables Sequence-Dependent Regulation without Global Structural Remodeling.The journal of physical chemistry. B · 2026Article
- Kaposi's Sarcoma-associated herpesvirus uses a novel protein fold to hijack RNA Polymerase II for viral late gene transcription.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- A tunable CTD grammar governs the spatial programming of the transcription cycle.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Residue-level mapping of crowding effects on protein phase separation.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026Article
- Live-cell single-molecule dynamics of eukaryotic RNA polymerase machineries.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Dynamic networks of intrinsically disordered regions in nuclear proteins.Biophysics and physicobiology · 2026Article
- Distinct mechanisms of recognition of phosphorylated RNAPII C-terminal domain by BRCT repeats of the BRCA1-BARD1 complex.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2026Article
- Article
- Liquid condensates: a new barrier to loop extrusion?Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The C-terminal domain of RPB1 (CTD) orchestrates transcription by recruiting regulators to RNA Pol II upon phosphorylation. With CTD driving condensate formation on gene loci, the molecular mechanism behind how CTD-mediated recruitment of transcriptional regulators influences condensates formation remains unclear. Our study unveils that phosphorylation reversibly dissolves phase separation induced by the unphosphorylated CTD. Phosphorylated CTD, upon specific association with transcription regulators, forms distinct condensates from unphosphorylated CTD. Functional studies demonstrate CTD variants with diverse condensation properties exhibit differences in promoter binding and mRNA co-processing in cells. Notably, varying CTD lengths influence the assembly of RNA processing machinery and alternative splicing outcomes, which in turn affects cellular growth, linking the evolution of CTD variation/length with the complexity of splicing from yeast to human. These findings provide compelling evidence for a model wherein post-translational modification enables the transition of functionally specialized condensates, highlighting a co-evolution link between CTD condensation and splicing.
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.