MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999520208 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m109067200

An RNA Activator of Subgenomic mRNA1 Transcription in Tomato Bushy Stunt Virus

2002· article· en· W1999520208 on OpenAlexaff
Il‐Ryong Choi, K. Andrew White

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubgenomic mRNARNABiologyTranscription (linguistics)CapsidGeneticsGeneMolecular biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many (+)-strand RNA viruses transcribe small subgenomic (sg) mRNAs that allow for regulated expression of a subset of their genes. Tomato bushy stunt virus (TBSV) transcribes two such messages and here we report the identification of a long-distance RNA*RNA interaction that is essential for the efficient accumulation of capsid protein-encoding sg mRNA1. The relevant base pairing interaction occurs within the TBSV RNA genome between a 7-nucleotide (nt) long sequence, separated by just 3 nt from the downstream sg mRNA1 initiation site, and a complementary sequence positioned some approximately 1000 nt further upstream. Analyses of this interaction indicate that it (i) functions in the (+)-strand, (ii) modulates both (+)- and (-)-strand sg mRNA1 accumulation, (iii) specifically regulates the accumulation of sg mRNA1 (-)-strands, (iv) controls sg mRNA1 expression from an ectopic transcriptional initiation site, (v) may occur in cis and, and (vi) could nucleate the formation of a more complex RNA structure. These data are most consistent with a role for this interaction in regulating sg mRNA1 accumulation at the level of transcription.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations51
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicPlant Virus Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207