MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988248658 · doi:10.1093/nar/gni093

A complementation method for functional analysis of mammalian genes

2005· article· en· W1988248658 on OpenAlexafffund
Juana Maria Gonzalez-Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health Research
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFoundation Fighting Blindness
KeywordsBiologyComplementationGeneticsGeneGene targetingMutantGenetic screen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our progress in understanding mammalian gene function has lagged behind that of gene identification. New methods for mammalian gene functional analysis are needed to accelerate the process. In yeast, the powerful genetic shuffle system allows deletion of any chromosomal gene by homologous recombination and episomal expression of a mutant allele in the same cell. Here, we report a method for mammalian cells, which employs a helper-dependent adenoviral (HD-Ad) vector to synthesize small hairpin (sh) RNAs to knock-down the expression of an endogenous gene by targeting untranslated regions (UTRs). The vector simultaneously expresses an exogenous version of the same gene (wild-type or mutant allele) lacking the UTRs for functional analysis. We demonstrated the utility of the method by using PRPF3, which encodes the human RNA splicing factor Hprp3p. Recently, missense mutations in PRPF3 were found to cause autosomal-dominant Retinitis Pigmentosa, a form of genetic eye diseases affecting the retina. We knocked-down endogenous PRPF3 in multiple cell lines and rescued the phenotype (cell death) with exogenous PRPF3 cDNA, thereby creating a genetic complementation method. Because Ad vectors can efficiently transduce a wide variety of cell types, and many tissues in vivo, this method could have a wide application for gene function studies.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.388 · 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207