Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288C. Reviewed for the
Yeast Cell Cycle & Translation Control
project (issue #3960).
Automated deep research was unavailable in this run (no provider API keys were
configured, so just deep-research yeast CLN1 failed for every provider). These
notes are therefore hand-assembled from the cached publications in
publications/ plus the UniProt record, and are not a
-deep-research-<provider>.md file.
PF00134 Cyclin_N, PROSITE PS00292 CYCLINS,PIRSF001770 Cyclin_CLN, InterPro IPR014399 Cyclin_CLN, and thecd20559 CYCLIN_ScCLN_likeIPR014399/PIRSF001770 Cyclin_CLN signature is the Cln1/Cln2-typeWITH/FROM-paired IGI rows forGO:0007089 traversing start control point of mitotic cell cycle, withWITH/FROM lists are easy to misread.Tyers et al. compared the three Cln proteins directly, and Cln1 falls on the
Cln2 side of every axis:
The cleanest CLN1-specific molecular-function experiment is the Stb1 kinase
assay. Cyclin-tagged complexes were pulled from yeast and assayed:
This is a Cln1-containing kinase complex, with Cln1 as the regulatory subunit —
the direct basis for both GO:0016538/GO:0061575 and
GO:0000307 cyclin-dependent protein kinase holoenzyme complex. ComplexPortal
curates the complex explicitly as CPX-1699 CLN1-CDC28 kinase complex
[file:yeast/CLN1/CLN1-uniprot.txt "ComplexPortal; CPX-1699; CLN1-CDC28 kinase complex."].
Cln1 also binds the second CDK Pho85, with two curated experiments
[file:yeast/CLN1/CLN1-uniprot.txt "P20437; P17157: PHO85; NbExp=2; IntAct=EBI-4479, EBI-13327;"].
The cited paper (PMID:9032248) is cached abstract-only and its abstract is about
the Pcl cyclins, so the Cln1-Pho85 affinity experiment itself is not visible in
our cache; the interaction is nonetheless recorded by IntAct and UniProt. Whether
a Cln1-Pho85 complex is physiologically meaningful is unresolved.
Cln1-GFP is in both compartments, imaged side by side with Cln2-GFP:
PMID:11080155.
This is the IDA source for the GO:0005634 and GO:0005737 rows. Note that the
finer-grained localisation results in the Cln literature (nuclear exclusion driven
by C-terminal phosphorylation, concentration at sites of polarised growth) were
obtained with Cln2, not Cln1; for Cln1 the evidence resolves no further than
nucleus and cytoplasm.
Cln1 and Cln2 are substrates of SCF(Grr1), not SCF(Cdc4)
PMID:11080155.
This is a review statement within the cited paper rather than a Cln1 experiment
in it, so it is recorded here as background, not as annotation support.
NEW I decided againstActions mirror those taken on the paralog genes/yeast/CLN2, because CLN1's
annotation set is a strict subset of CLN2's and the same term-level arguments
apply:
GO:0016538 (4 rows: IBA, IEA, IDA x2) -> MODIFY toGO:0061575 cyclin-dependent protein serine/threonine kinase activator activity.GO:0061575 is the supported descendant.GO:0005515 (7 IPI rows, 6 with CDC28 and 1 with PHO85) -> MODIFY toGO:0019901 protein kinase binding. Both partners are protein kinases, and theACCEPT/KEEP_AS_NON_CORE on it.GO:2000045 and GO:1902806 (both unsigned "regulation of G1/S") -> MODIFYGO:1900087 positive regulation of G1/S transition of mitotic cell cycle.GO:0000082, GO:0000307, GO:0005634, GO:0005737, GO:0007089 ->ACCEPT.Considered and rejected: a NEW
GO:0180040 negative regulation of pheromone response MAPK cascade row, on the
strength of the Cln1-specific Ste5/Ste20 phosphorylation above. The comparator
check argues against it. In budding yeast only PPQ1 and AKR1 carry GO:0180040
(QuickGO, taxon 559292/4932, queried 2026-10-23), and CLN2 — which has
considerably stronger Ste5 evidence than CLN1, including PMID:17289571 — does not
carry it either. What CLN2 carries instead is
GO:0000321 re-entry into mitotic cell cycle after pheromone arrest (IGI,
PMID:9927449). That is a convention about how SGD annotates the Cln-pheromone
relationship, not a twenty-year gap, so the point is raised in
suggested_questions rather than asserted. CLN1 has no GO:0000321 row of its
own and I did not propose one: the PMID:9927449 genetics behind CLN2's rows is
not in our cache and I cannot tell whether CLN1 was assayed.
Recorded in suggested_questions / suggested_experiments of the review:
whether Cln1 and Cln2 are genuinely interchangeable or have private substrates;
whether the Cln1-Pho85 interaction is physiological; and what, if anything,
distinguishes Cln1's contribution to the morphogenesis burst from Cln2's.