Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 133

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Live-cell p53 single-molecule binding is modulated by C-terminal acetylation and correlates with transcriptional activity

Loffreda, Alessia, Jacchetti, Emanuela, Antunes, Sofia, Rainone, Paolo, Daniele, Tiziana, Morisaki, Tatsuya, Bianchi, Marco E., Tacchetti, Carlo, Mazza, Davide·2017·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-017-00398-7PMC PMC5567047
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Live-cell microscopy has highlighted that transcription factors bind transiently to chromatin but it is not clear if the duration of these binding interactions can be modulated in response to an activation stimulus, and if such modulation can be controlled by post-translational modifications of the transcription factor. We address this question for the tumor suppressor p53 by combining live-cell single-molecule microscopy and single cell in situ measurements of transcription and we show that p53-binding kinetics are modulated following genotoxic stress. The modulation of p53 residence times on chromatin requires C-terminal acetylation—a classical mark for transcriptionally active p53—and correlates with the induction of transcription of target genes such as CDKN1a. We propose a model in which the modification state of the transcription factor determines the coupling between transcription factor abundance and transcriptional activity by tuning the transcription factor residence time on target sites.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-017-00398-7

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Single-molecule tracking of HaloTag-p53 in response to DNA damage. a, b Characterization of MCF-7/6/Hp53 cell line a Western blot of p53 and HaloTag-p53 at different times following the induction of DNA damage by 10 Gy IR in MCF-7/6/Hp53, a stable cell line expressing HaloTag-p53, and in the parental breast cancer cell line MCF-7 (2 replicates). b Representative confocal microscopy fields of MCF-7/6/HaloTag-p53 cells before and after exposure to 10 Gy IR. HaloTag-p53 was labeled with HaloTag-TMR fluorescent ligand. A small fraction of cells displays high HaloTag-p53 levels even when unstimulated. Scale bar 15 µm. A similar fraction of p53-positive cells can be identified in the parental cell line by immunofluorescence. Scale bar 15 µm. c–e Single-molecule tracking of HaloTag-p53. c The average projection of the images allows the identification of the cell nucleus and of the sites of relatively stable immobilization of the single molecules, which appear as bright spots. Scale bar 5 µm. d The movies were tracked to compute the distribution of single-molecule displacements (n cells = 8, n displacements = 8876 for 0 h and 7973 for 2 h). The distributions were fitted with a three-component diffusion model, where the slowest diffusion component is representative of chromatin-bound molecules. The insets show the cumulative distribution of displacements. Fitted parameters are shown in Table 1. e The experiments above were repeated at different times following the induction of DNA damage to measure the diffusion coefficients and the fraction of molecules in the bound state and in the two free states (3 replicates, n cells = 17, 9, 23, 26, 22, n displacements = 18 609, 8704, 41 854, 38 155, 22 889 for 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 h after DNA damage, error bars: SD)
Fig. 1 Single-molecule tracking of HaloTag-p53 in response to DNA damage. a, b Characterization of MCF-7/6/Hp53 cell line a Western blot of p53 and HaloTag-p53 at different times following the induction of DNA damage by 10 Gy IR in MCF-7/6/Hp53, a stable cell line expressing HaloTag-p53, and in the parental breast cancer cell line MCF-7 (2 replicates). b Representative confocal microscopy fields of MCF-7/6/HaloTag-p53 cells before and after exposure to 10 Gy IR. HaloTag-p53 was labeled with HaloTag-TMR fluorescent ligand. A small fraction of cells displays high HaloTag-p53 levels even when unstimulated. Scale bar 15 µm. A similar fraction of p53-positive cells can be identified in the parental cell line by immunofluorescence. Scale bar 15 µm. c–e Single-molecule tracking of HaloTag-p53. c The average projection of the images allows the identification of the cell nucleus and of the sites of relatively stable immobilization of the single molecules, which appear as bright spots. Scale bar 5 µm. d The movies were tracked to compute the distribution of single-molecule displacements (n cells = 8, n displacements = 8876 for 0 h and 7973 for 2 h). The distributions were fitted with a three-component diffusion model, where the slowest diffusion component is representative of chromatin-bound molecules. The insets show the cumulative distribution of displacements. Fitted parameters are shown in Table 1. e The experiments above were repeated at different times following the induction of DNA damage to measure the diffusion coefficients and the fraction of molecules in the bound state and in the two free states (3 replicates, n cells = 17, 9, 23, 26, 22, n displacements = 18 609, 8704, 41 854, 38 155, 22 889 for 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 h after DNA damage, error bars: SD)CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Measurement of the p53 residence time by kymograph analysis. a In kymograph representation, chromatin-bound transcription factors (white rectangles) appear as horizontal segments parallel to the temporal axis: the duration of each binding event is provided by the length of the segment. Typically, 2 h after irradiation p53 displays longer binding events than in unstimulated conditions. b The measured binding events are used to populate the complement cumulative distribution function (3 replicates, n cells = 18, 23, and 20, n bound = 108, 171, 81 for 0 h, 2 h, and 4 h, respectively) which is then corrected for the observational photobleaching and fit by a bi-exponential distribution (See Supplementary Methods). c The model provides estimates for the average residence time of p53 to chromatin and combined with the information on p53 bound fraction (Fig. 1) allows estimating the average free time between binding events. d The bi-exponential fit also provides estimates for the residence time of the short-lived population, for the long-lived residence time, and for the fraction of molecules in each of these states. The time that p53 spends searching for these stable sites is calculated as described in the Supplementary Methods (error bars: 95% CI)
Fig. 2 Measurement of the p53 residence time by kymograph analysis. a In kymograph representation, chromatin-bound transcription factors (white rectangles) appear as horizontal segments parallel to the temporal axis: the duration of each binding event is provided by the length of the segment. Typically, 2 h after irradiation p53 displays longer binding events than in unstimulated conditions. b The measured binding events are used to populate the complement cumulative distribution function (3 replicates, n cells = 18, 23, and 20, n bound = 108, 171, 81 for 0 h, 2 h, and 4 h, respectively) which is then corrected for the observational photobleaching and fit by a bi-exponential distribution (See Supplementary Methods). c The model provides estimates for the average residence time of p53 to chromatin and combined with the information on p53 bound fraction (Fig. 1) allows estimating the average free time between binding events. d The bi-exponential fit also provides estimates for the residence time of the short-lived population, for the long-lived residence time, and for the fraction of molecules in each of these states. The time that p53 spends searching for these stable sites is calculated as described in the Supplementary Methods (error bars: 95% CI)CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 An increase in p53 levels is not sufficient in modulating p53-binding kinetics but p53-CTD acetylation is also necessary. a Western blot of HaloTag-p53 total protein and acetylated at lysine 382 upon exposure to 10 Gy IR or Doxycycline. Quantifications of western blots are provided in Supplementary Fig. 4. b Complement cumulative distribution of single-molecule displacements at different times upon induction of HaloTag-p53 expression by doxycycline and measured bound fraction (inset, 3 replicates, n cells = 25, 19, 25, 9, n displacements = 14 278, 14 420, 10 807, 11 227 for 0 h, 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h after doxycycline, respectively. c Distribution of residence times and average residence times (inset) following doxycycline induction (n bound = 80, 180, 67, 80). d Western blot of HaloTag-p53 total protein and acetylated at lysine 382 upon irradiation and upon the combination of IR and Wortmannin. Quantifications of western blots are provided in Supplementary Fig. 4. e Cumulative distribution of displacements (2 replicates, n cells = 17, 15, 15, n displacements = 17 592, 9846, 17 272 for Ctrl, IR, IR+Wort, respectively) and f the complement cumulative distribution of residence times (n bound = 115, 107, 172) upon irradiation and treatment with Wortmannin (error bars: SD for bound fractions, 95% CI for average residence times)
Fig. 3 An increase in p53 levels is not sufficient in modulating p53-binding kinetics but p53-CTD acetylation is also necessary. a Western blot of HaloTag-p53 total protein and acetylated at lysine 382 upon exposure to 10 Gy IR or Doxycycline. Quantifications of western blots are provided in Supplementary Fig. 4. b Complement cumulative distribution of single-molecule displacements at different times upon induction of HaloTag-p53 expression by doxycycline and measured bound fraction (inset, 3 replicates, n cells = 25, 19, 25, 9, n displacements = 14 278, 14 420, 10 807, 11 227 for 0 h, 2 h, 4 h, and 24 h after doxycycline, respectively. c Distribution of residence times and average residence times (inset) following doxycycline induction (n bound = 80, 180, 67, 80). d Western blot of HaloTag-p53 total protein and acetylated at lysine 382 upon irradiation and upon the combination of IR and Wortmannin. Quantifications of western blots are provided in Supplementary Fig. 4. e Cumulative distribution of displacements (2 replicates, n cells = 17, 15, 15, n displacements = 17 592, 9846, 17 272 for Ctrl, IR, IR+Wort, respectively) and f the complement cumulative distribution of residence times (n bound = 115, 107, 172) upon irradiation and treatment with Wortmannin (error bars: SD for bound fractions, 95% CI for average residence times)CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Dissecting the role of CTD acetylation in binding. a Scheme of the treatments and p53 mutants. Expression levels of (HaloTag)-p53 upon the different treatments are shown. b Cumulative distribution of displacements (top) and complement cumulative distribution function of the single-molecule residence times (bottom) for control MCF-7/6/Hp53 cells, and cells transfected with a short-hairpin inhibiting the methyltransferase Set8 (3 replicates, n cells = 22, 23 for CTRL and Set8 Sh1, respectively). c Distribution of displacements (top) and complement cumulative distribution function of the single-molecule residence times (bottom) for HaloTag-p53-wt, HaloTag-p53-K382Q, or HaloTag-p53-6Q (acetylation mimicking mutants) transiently transfected in H1299 cells (insets, 3 replicates, n cells = 28, 24, and 18 for WT, K382Q, and 6Q, respectively). d Distribution of displacements for HaloTag-p53-wt (top, 2 replicates, n cells = 19 for no irradiation and 16 for 10 Gy IR) and p53-K382R (acetylation inhibiting mutant, bottom, 2 replicates, n cells = 16 for no irradiation and 15 for 10 Gy IR) transiently transfected in H1299 cells before and 2 h after irradiation (error bars: SD for bound fractions, 95% CI for average residence times)
Fig. 4 Dissecting the role of CTD acetylation in binding. a Scheme of the treatments and p53 mutants. Expression levels of (HaloTag)-p53 upon the different treatments are shown. b Cumulative distribution of displacements (top) and complement cumulative distribution function of the single-molecule residence times (bottom) for control MCF-7/6/Hp53 cells, and cells transfected with a short-hairpin inhibiting the methyltransferase Set8 (3 replicates, n cells = 22, 23 for CTRL and Set8 Sh1, respectively). c Distribution of displacements (top) and complement cumulative distribution function of the single-molecule residence times (bottom) for HaloTag-p53-wt, HaloTag-p53-K382Q, or HaloTag-p53-6Q (acetylation mimicking mutants) transiently transfected in H1299 cells (insets, 3 replicates, n cells = 28, 24, and 18 for WT, K382Q, and 6Q, respectively). d Distribution of displacements for HaloTag-p53-wt (top, 2 replicates, n cells = 19 for no irradiation and 16 for 10 Gy IR) and p53-K382R (acetylation inhibiting mutant, bottom, 2 replicates, n cells = 16 for no irradiation and 15 for 10 Gy IR) transiently transfected in H1299 cells before and 2 h after irradiation (error bars: SD for bound fractions, 95% CI for average residence times)CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Population and single-cell transcriptional response to the modulation of p53-binding kinetics. a qPCR of p53 targets following irradiation (3 replicates, error bars: SD). b qPCR of p53 targets following induction of HaloTag-p53 expression by doxycycline (3 replicates, error bars: SD). c–g smFISH imaging of CDKN1a. c smFISH is performed by hybridizing multiple labeled oligonucleotides to the specific RNA and acquiring 3D stacks to count mature RNAs (white square) and nascent RNAs at transcription sites (red square, maximum projection displayed). d Average amount of mature (top panel) and nascent (bottom panel) RNA per cell (top panel, 2 replicates, n cells = 91, 121, 64 for 0 h, 2 h and 4 h, respectively; ANOVA-Tukey test). The measurement of nascent CDKN1a RNA was validated by qPCR, using primers targeting pre-spliced CDKN1a RNA (See Supplementary Fig. 4) e Correlation of cell-by-cell number of nascent transcripts vs. nuclear intensity of HaloTag-p53. Nascent CDKN1a is correlated with p53 levels 2 h after the induction of damage (Pearson correlation, r = 0.55, p < 0.0001, slope = 0.0043) but not before the induction of damage (r = 0.12, p > 0.1), nor 4 h after (r = 0.27, p > 0.1), f Number of detected active CDKN1a transcription sites per cell (left panel) and amount of nascent CDKN1a RNA per active site (right panel) (2 replicates, n cells = 91, 121, 64 for 0 h, 2 h, and 4 h, respectively; ANOVA-Tukey test). g Exemplary smFISH for the treatments with Doxycycline and IR+Wortmannin (top-left). Correlation between p53 residence time, number of active CDKN1a transcription sites per cell and p53-CTD acetylation across the tested conditions (top-right). The radius of the displayed dots is proportional to the amount of HaloTag-p53-Ac382. Correlations coefficients are shown in Table 2 (error bars: SEM for FISH data, 95% CI for residence times)
Fig. 5 Population and single-cell transcriptional response to the modulation of p53-binding kinetics. a qPCR of p53 targets following irradiation (3 replicates, error bars: SD). b qPCR of p53 targets following induction of HaloTag-p53 expression by doxycycline (3 replicates, error bars: SD). c–g smFISH imaging of CDKN1a. c smFISH is performed by hybridizing multiple labeled oligonucleotides to the specific RNA and acquiring 3D stacks to count mature RNAs (white square) and nascent RNAs at transcription sites (red square, maximum projection displayed). d Average amount of mature (top panel) and nascent (bottom panel) RNA per cell (top panel, 2 replicates, n cells = 91, 121, 64 for 0 h, 2 h and 4 h, respectively; ANOVA-Tukey test). The measurement of nascent CDKN1a RNA was validated by qPCR, using primers targeting pre-spliced CDKN1a RNA (See Supplementary Fig. 4) e Correlation of cell-by-cell number of nascent transcripts vs. nuclear intensity of HaloTag-p53. Nascent CDKN1a is correlated with p53 levels 2 h after the induction of damage (Pearson correlation, r = 0.55, p < 0.0001, slope = 0.0043) but not before the induction of damage (r = 0.12, p > 0.1), nor 4 h after (r = 0.27, p > 0.1), f Number of detected active CDKN1a transcription sites per cell (left panel) and amount of nascent CDKN1a RNA per active site (right panel) (2 replicates, n cells = 91, 121, 64 for 0 h, 2 h, and 4 h, respectively; ANOVA-Tukey test). g Exemplary smFISH for the treatments with Doxycycline and IR+Wortmannin (top-left). Correlation between p53 residence time, number of active CDKN1a transcription sites per cell and p53-CTD acetylation across the tested conditions (top-right). The radius of the displayed dots is proportional to the amount of HaloTag-p53-Ac382. Correlations coefficients are shown in Table 2 (error bars: SEM for FISH data, 95% CI for residence times)CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 43

  1. Appella, E. & Anderson, C. W. Post-translational modifications and activation of p53 by genotoxic stresses. Eur. J. Biochem. 268, 2764–2772 (2001). · DOI · Paper page
  2. Filtz, T. M., Vogel, W. K. & Leid, M. Regulation of transcription factor activity by interconnected post-translational modifications. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 35, 76–85 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  3. Hager, G. L., McNally, J. G. & Misteli, T. Transcription dynamics. Mol. Cell 35, 741–753 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  4. Coulon, A., Chow, C. C., Singer, R. H. & Larson, D. R. Eukaryotic transcriptional dynamics: from single molecules to cell populations. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 572–584 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  5. Larson, D. R., Singer, R. H. & Zenklusen, D. A single molecule view of gene expression. Trends Cell Biol. 19, 630–637 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  6. Larson, D. R., Zenklusen, D., Wu, B., Chao, J. A. & Singer, R. H. Real-time observation of transcription initiation and elongation on an endogenous yeast gene. Science 332, 475–478 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  7. Mueller, F., Stasevich, T. J., Mazza, D. & McNally, J. G. Quantifying transcription factor kinetics: at work or at play? Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 48, 492–514 (2013). · DOI
  8. Batchelor, E., Loewer, A., Mock, C. & Lahav, G. Stimulus-dependent dynamics of p53 in single cells. Mol. Syst. Biol. 7, 488 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  9. Loewer, A., Batchelor, E., Gaglia, G. & Lahav, G. Basal dynamics of p53 reveal transcriptionally attenuated pulses in cycling cells. Cell 142, 89–100 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  10. Gu, W. & Roeder, R. G. Activation of p53 sequence-specific DNA binding by acetylation of the p53 C-terminal domain. Cell 90, 595–606 (1997). · DOI · Paper page
  11. Barlev, N. A. et al. Acetylation of p53 activates transcription through recruitment of coactivators/histone acetyltransferases. Mol. Cell 8, 1243–1254 (2001). · DOI · Paper page
  12. Laptenko, O. et al. The p53 C terminus controls site-specific DNA binding and promotes structural changes within the central DNA binding domain. Mol. Cell 57, 1034–1046 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  13. Kaeser, M. D. & Iggo, R. D. Chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis fails to support the latency model for regulation of p53 DNA binding activity in vivo. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 95–100 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  14. Schmiedeberg, L., Skene, P., Deaton, A. & Bird, A. A temporal threshold for formaldehyde crosslinking and fixation. PLoS ONE 4, e4636 (2009). · DOI
  15. Baranello, L., Kouzine, F., Sanford, S. & Levens, D. ChIP bias as a function of cross-linking time. Chromosome Res. Int. J. Mol. Supramol. Evol. Asp. Chromosome Biol. 24, 175–181 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  16. Hinow, P. et al. The DNA binding activity of p53 displays reaction-diffusion kinetics. Biophys. J. 91, 330–342 (2006). · DOI
  17. Mueller, F., Wach, P. & McNally, J. G. Evidence for a common mode of transcription factor interaction with chromatin as revealed by improved quantitative fluorescence recovery after photobleaching. Biophys. J. 94, 3323–3339 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  18. Mazza, D., Abernathy, A., Golob, N., Morisaki, T. & McNally, J. G. A benchmark for chromatin binding measurements in live cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, e119 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  19. Morisaki, T., Müller, W. G., Golob, N., Mazza, D. & Mcnally, J. G. Single-molecule analysis of transcription factor binding at transcription sites in live cells. Nat. Commun. 5, 4456 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  20. Los, G. V. et al. HaloTag: a novel protein labeling technology for cell imaging and protein analysis. ACS Chem. Biol. 3, 373–382 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  21. Tokunaga, M., Imamoto, N. & Sakata-Sogawa, K. Highly inclined thin illumination enables clear single-molecule imaging in cells. Nat. Methods 5, 159–161 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  22. Speil, J. et al. Activated STAT1 transcription factors conduct distinct saltatory movements in the cell nucleus. Biophys. J. 101, 2592–2600 (2011). · DOI
  23. Hihara, S. et al. Local nucleosome dynamics facilitate chromatin accessibility in living mammalian cells. Cell Rep. 2, 1645–1656 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Sugo, N. et al. Single-molecule imaging reveals dynamics of CREB transcription factor bound to its target sequence. Sci. Rep. 5, 10662 (2015). · DOI
  25. Shi, X. et al. Modulation of p53 function by SET8-mediated methylation at lysine 382. Mol. Cell 27, 636–646 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  26. Lee, R. E. C., Walker, S. R., Savery, K., Frank, D. A. & Gaudet, S. Fold change of nuclear NF-κB determines TNF-induced transcription in single cells. Mol. Cell 53, 867–879 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  27. Mueller, F. et al. FISH-quant: automatic counting of transcripts in 3D FISH images. Nat. Methods 10, 277–278 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  28. Senecal, A. et al. Transcription factors modulate c-Fos transcriptional bursts. Cell Rep. 8, 75–83 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  29. Levine, J. H., Lin, Y. & Elowitz, M. B. Functional roles of pulsing in genetic circuits. Science 342, 1193–1200 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  30. Murray-Zmijewski, F., Slee, E. A. & Lu, X. A complex barcode underlies the heterogeneous response of p53 to stress. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 9, 702–712 (2008). · DOI · Paper page
  31. Luo, J. et al. Acetylation of p53 augments its site-specific DNA binding both in vitro and in vivo. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 2259–2264 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  32. Chang, G. S. et al. A comprehensive and high-resolution genome-wide response of p53 to stress. Cell Rep. 8, 514–527 (2014). · DOI
  33. Mazza, D., Mueller, F., Stasevich, T. J. & McNally, J. G. Convergence of chromatin binding estimates in live cells. Nat. Methods 10, 691–692 (2013). · DOI
  34. Normanno, D., Dahan, M. & Darzacq, X. Intra-nuclear mobility and target search mechanisms of transcription factors: A single-molecule perspective on gene expression. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1819, 482–493 (2012). · DOI
  35. Normanno, D. et al. Probing the target search of DNA-binding proteins in mammalian cells using TetR as model searcher. Nat. Commun. 6, 7357 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  36. Tafvizi, A., Huang, F., Fersht, A. R., Mirny, L. A. & van Oijen, A. M. A single-molecule characterization of p53 search on DNA. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 563–568 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  37. Allen, M. A. et al. Global analysis of p53-regulated transcription identifies its direct targets and unexpected regulatory mechanisms. eLife 3, e02200 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  38. Shaked, H. et al. Chromatin immunoprecipitation–on-chip reveals stress-dependent p53 occupancy in primary normal cells but not in established cell lines. Cancer Res. 68, 9671–9677 (2008). · DOI
  39. Stavreva, D. A., Müller, W. G., Hager, G. L., Smith, C. L. & McNally, J. G. Rapid glucocorticoid receptor exchange at a promoter is coupled to transcription and regulated by chaperones and proteasomes. Mol. Cell Biol. 24, 2682–2697 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  40. Chen, B. et al. Dynamic imaging of genomic loci in living human cells by an optimized CRISPR/Cas system. Cell 155, 1479–1491 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  41. Kaku, S. et al. Binding to the naturally occurring double p53 binding site of the Mdm2 promoter alleviates the requirement for p53 C-terminal activation. Nucleic Acids Res. 29, 1989–1993 (2001). · DOI
  42. Lukinavičius, G. et al. A near-infrared fluorophore for live-cell super-resolution microscopy of cellular proteins. Nat. Chem. 5, 132–139 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
  43. Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 676–682 (2012). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 133

Metadata

Authors
Loffreda, A., Jacchetti, E., Antunes, S., Rainone, P., Daniele, T., Morisaki, T., Bianchi, M. E., Tacchetti, C., & Mazza, D.
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-08-22
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
2041-1723
DOI
10.1038/s41467-017-00398-7
PMC
PMC5567047
Cited by
133
References
9
Language
en
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Live-cell p53 single-molecule binding is modulated by C-terminal acetylation and correlates with transcriptional activity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/s41467-017-00398-7
The paper
Loffreda, A., Jacchetti, E., Antunes, S., Rainone, P., Daniele, T., Morisaki, T., Bianchi, M. E., Tacchetti, C., & Mazza, D. (2017). Live-cell p53 single-molecule binding is modulated by C-terminal acetylation and correlates with transcriptional activity. Nature Communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-00398-7

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.