Genome-wide analysis of Staufen-associated mRNAs identifies secondary structures that confer target specificity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite studies that have investigated the interactions of double-stranded RNA-binding proteins like Staufen with RNA in vitro, how they achieve target specificity in vivo remains uncertain. We performed RNA co-immunoprecipitations followed by microarray analysis to identify Staufen-associated mRNAs in early Drosophila embryos. Analysis of the localization and functions of these transcripts revealed a number of potentially novel roles for Staufen. Using computational methods, we identified two sequence features that distinguish Staufen's target transcripts from non-targets. First, these Drosophila transcripts, as well as those human transcripts bound by human Staufen1 and 2, have 3' untranslated regions (UTRs) that are 3-4-fold longer than unbound transcripts. Second, the 3'UTRs of Staufen-bound transcripts are highly enriched for three types of secondary structures. These structures map with high precision to previously identified Staufen-binding regions in Drosophila bicoid and human ARF1 3'UTRs. Our results provide the first systematic genome-wide analysis showing how a double-stranded RNA-binding protein achieves target specificity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".