MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046431824 · doi:10.1186/1756-0500-5-241

Decoding the informational properties of the RNA polymerase II Carboxy Terminal Domain

2012· article· en· W2046431824 on OpenAlexaff
Jim Karagiannis

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Research Notes · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCTDRNA polymerase IIComputational biologyBiologyComputer scienceGeneGeneticsGene expressionCell biologyPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The largest sub-unit of RNA polymerase II, Rpb1p, has long been known to be subject to post-translational modifications that influence various aspects of pre-mRNA processing. However, the portion of the Rpb1p molecule subject to these modifications - the carboxy-terminal domain or CTD - remains the subject of much fascination. Intriguingly, the CTD possesses a unique repetitive structure consisting of multiple repeats of the heptapeptide sequence, Y(1)S(2)P(3)T(4)S(5)P(6)S(7). While these repeats are critical for viability, they are not required for basal transcriptional activity in vitro. This suggests that - even though the CTD is not catalytically essential - it must perform other critical functions in eukaryotes. PRESENTATION OF THE HYPOTHESIS: By formally applying the long-standing mathematical principles of information theory, I explore the hypothesis that complex post-translational modifications of the CTD represent a means for the dynamic "programming" of Rpb1p and thus for the discrete modulation of the expression of specific gene subsets in eukaryotes. TESTING THE HYPOTHESIS: Empirical means for testing the informational capacity and regulatory potential of the CTD - based on simple genetic analysis in yeast model systems - are put forward and discussed. IMPLICATIONS OF THE HYPOTHESIS: These ideas imply that the controlled manipulation of CTD effectors could be used to "program" the CTD and thus to manipulate biological processes in eukaryotes in a definable manner.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Research NotesSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207