ROP-1, an RNA quality-control pathway component, affects <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> dauer formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Caenorhabditis elegans dauer formation is an alternative larval developmental pathway that the worm can take when environmental conditions become detrimental. Animals can survive several months in this stress-resistant stage and can resume normal development when growth conditions improve. Although the worms integrate a variety of sensory information to commit to dauer formation, it is currently unknown whether they also monitor internal cellular damage. The Ro ribonucleoprotein complex, which was initially described as a human autoantigen, is composed of one major 60-kDa protein, Ro60, that binds to one of four small RNA molecules, designated Y RNAs. Ro60 has been shown to bind mutant 5S rRNA molecules in Xenopus oocytes, suggesting a role for Ro60 in 5S rRNA biogenesis. Analysis of ribosomes from a C. elegans rop-1(-) strain, which is null for the expression of Ro60, demonstrated that they contain a high percentage of mutant 5S rRNA molecules, thereby strengthening the notion of a link between the rop-1 gene product and 5S rRNA quality control. The Ro particle was recently shown to be involved in the resistance of Deinococcus radiodurans to UV irradiation, suggesting a role for the Ro complex in stress resistance. We have studied the role of rop-1 in dauer formation. We present genetic and biochemical evidence that rop-1 interacts with dauer-formation genes and is involved in the regulation of the worms' entry into the dauer stage. Furthermore, we find that the rop-1 gene product undergoes a proteolytic processing step that is regulated by the dauer formation pathway via an aspartic proteinase. These results suggest that the Ro particle may function in an RNA quality-control checkpoint for dauer formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".