Parallels in rRNA Processing: Conserved Features in the Processing of the Internal Transcribed Spacer 1 in the Pre-rRNA from <i>Schizosaccharomyces </i>pombe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the large differences in their length and nucleotide composition, comparative analyses of the internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS1) of widely divergent eukaryotes have suggested a simple core structure consisting of a central extended hairpin and lesser hairpin structures at the maturing junctions [Lalev, A. I., and Nazar, R. N. (1998) J. Mol. Biol. 284, 1341-1351]. In this study, the ITS1 in the pre-rRNA transcripts of Schizosaccharomyces pombe cells was examined with respect to structural features that underlie rRNA maturation. When plasmid-associated rRNA genes were expressed in vivo, a deletion of any major hairpin structure significantly reduced or eliminated both small and large subunit RNAs. Only changes in the central extended hairpin or junction regions, however, entirely eliminated plasmid-derived RNAs or resulted in elevated precursor levels. Structure-disrupting base substitutions within the RAC protein complex binding site in the extended hairpin indicated that the secondary structure was critical for rRNA maturation; composition or other changes with respect to the binding site had only modest effects. A similar disruption at the junction with the 18S rRNA also had striking effects on rRNA maturation, including a highly elevated level of unprocessed precursor and a surprisingly critical effect on 5.8S rRNA production. As previously observed with the 3' external transcribed spacer, the results are consistent with a maturation mechanism in which an initial cleavage in the 5' junction region may be directed by the RAC protein complex. Although not critical to rRNA processing, analyses of termini based on S1 nuclease protection as well as cleavage studies, in vitro, with Pac1 ribonuclease raise the possibility that in eukaryotes, as previously observed in bacteria, the RNase III homologues normally initiate the separation of the subunit RNAs.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".