MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044208702 · doi:10.1155/jbb/2006/16806

Hypothesis: A Role for Fragile X Mental Retardation Protein in Mediating and Relieving MicroRNA‐Guided Translational Repression?

2006· article· en· W2044208702 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Plante, Patrick Provost

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersInstitute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and AddictionInstitute of GeneticsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsmicroRNAMessenger RNAGene silencingPsychological repressionTranslation (biology)BiologyEffectorCell biologyRNAGeneticsGene expressionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MicroRNA (miRNA)-guided messenger RNA (mRNA) translational repression is believed to be mediated by effector miRNA-containing ribonucleoprotein (miRNP) complexes harboring fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRP). Recent studies documented the nucleic acid chaperone properties of FMRP and characterized its role and importance in RNA silencing in mammalian cells. We propose a model in which FMRP could facilitate miRNA assembly on target mRNAs in a process involving recognition of G quartet structures. Functioning within a duplex miRNP, FMRP may also mediate mRNA targeting through a strand exchange mechanism, in which the miRNA* of the duplex is swapped for the mRNA. Furthermore, FMRP may contribute to the relief of miRNA-guided mRNA repression through a reverse strand exchange reaction, possibly initiated by a specific cellular signal, that would liberate the mRNA for translation. Suboptimal utilization of miRNAs may thus account for some of themolecular defects in patients with the fragile X syndrome.

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 score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations25
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMed Research InternationalSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207