Closed hattrill closed 7 years ago
Hi @hattrill It seems clear in the literature that SAGA is considered a co-factor: http://genesdev.cshlp.org/content/28/18/1999.long
There are several primary annotations; I suggest that you dispute the primary annotations; what do you think ? @Tanya AT4G16420 @srengel S000002856 (+Candida: CAL0000192402)
Thanks, Pascale
The problem is that although SAG is considered a cofactor, it completely fits the GO def of TF in that it both 1) binds DNA (ada subunit has a DNA binding domain) and 2) Regulates transcription.
This implies that the def of trancription factor needs refining. Not all types of transctiptional regulation + DNA binding = "transcription factor"
I'm basing this on the fact that ADa2 has a homeobox. Maybe it does not bind DNA, but for sure some chromatin remodelling type co-factors do. I always felt that something else was required in the def
With respect to definition of "transcription factor", also remember that not all transcription factors bind DNA.
Well, I guess it is ok - looking at enhanceosomes, etc. seems that many have HAT activity.
I checked last night and SAGA binds to TBP and RNA pol II, so co-factor fits for this.
We still have an issue that other non co-factor chromatin remodellers also fit the DNA binding TF def .....
And, some domains e.g. SANT-MYB, MADF-BESS and ARID domains pop up in cofactors, DNA binding TFs and remodellers.
@hattrill @ValWood So, can this issue be closed ? It doesnt seem to be a problem with the annotations of the family.
Thanks, Pascale
I am ok with closing this.
seems like nothing here to do for Sc ADA2. please let me know if i have misunderstood.
Right, I dont think so, the annotations were right.
For the nodes populated for PTN000271860, I am wondering whether the transcription factor terms are appropriate. This is a subunit of HAT complexes, rather than a transcription factor per se. Term: transcription factor activity, sequence-specific DNA binding There is some early evidence for interactions with transcription factors, so perhaps co-activator is ok, but it doesn't seem to feature much in current thinking.