MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976007923 · doi:10.1515/bc.2008.003

Reassessing the role of a 3′-UTR-binding translational inhibitor in regulation of circadian bioluminescence rhythm in the dinoflagellate <i>Gonyaulax</i>

2007· article· en· W1976007923 on OpenAlexaff
Mathieu Lapointe, David Morse

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Chemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioluminescenceLuciferaseCircadian rhythmLuciferinUntranslated regionBiologyTranslational regulationChemistryRNARNA-binding proteinBiochemistryCell biologyMessenger RNAMolecular biologyTranslation (biology)GeneTransfection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nightly bioluminescence of the dinoflagellate Gonyaulax is a circadian rhythm caused by the presence in cells of specialized bioluminescent organelles, termed scintillons, containing the reaction catalyst luciferase, the substrate luciferin and a luciferin-binding protein (LBP). LBP levels increase at the start of the night phase because of increased protein synthesis rates in vivo, and this regulation has been ascribed to circadian binding of an inhibitory protein factor binding to the 3' untranslated region (UTR) of lbp mRNA at times when LBP is not normally synthesized. To purify and characterize the binding factor, the electrophoretic mobility shift assays and UV crosslinking experiments used to first characterize the factor were repeated. However, neither these protocols nor binding to biotinylated RNA probes confirmed the presence of a specific circadian RNA-binding protein. Furthermore, neither RNA probe screening of a cDNA library expressed in bacteria nor three-hybrid assays in yeast were successful in isolating a cDNA encoding a protein able to bind specifically to the lbp 3'UTR. Taken together, these results suggest that alternative mechanisms for regulating lbp translation should now be examined.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological ChemistrySame topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207