Amino acid limitation regulates the expression of genes involved in several specific biological processes through GCN2‐dependent and GCN2‐independent pathways
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence has accumulated that amino acids play an important role in controlling gene expression. Nevertheless, two components of the amino acid control of gene expression are not yet completely understood in mammals: (a) the target genes and biological processes regulated by amino acid availability, and (b) the signaling pathways that mediate the amino acid response. Using large-scale analysis of gene expression, the objective of this study was to gain a better understanding of the control of gene expression by amino acid limitation. We found that a 6 h period of leucine starvation regulated the expression of a specific set of genes: 420 genes were up-regulated by more than 1.8-fold and 311 genes were down-regulated. These genes were involved in the control of several biological processes, such as amino acid metabolism, lipid metabolism and signal regulation. Using GCN2-/- cells and rapamycin treatment, we checked for the role of mGCN2 and mTORC1 kinases in this regulation. We found that (a) the GCN2 pathway was the major, but not unique, signaling pathway involved in the up- and down-regulation of gene expression in response to amino acid starvation, and (b) that rapamycin regulates the expression of a set of genes that only partially overlaps with the set of genes regulated by leucine starvation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it