Identification of amino acids responsible for stop codon recognition for polypeptide chain release factor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One factor involved in eukaryotic translation termination is class 1 release factor in eukaryotes (eRF1), which functions to decode stop codons. Variant code species, such as ciliates, frequently exhibit altered stop codon recognition. Studies revealed that some class-specific residues in the eRF1 N-terminal domain are responsible for stop codon reassignment in ciliates. Here, we investigated the effects on stop codon recognition of chimeric eRF1s containing the N-terminal domain of Euplotes octocarinatus and Blepharisma japonicum eRF1 fused to Saccharomyces cerevisiae M and C domains using dual luciferase read-through assays. Mutation of class-specific residues in different eRF1 classes was also studied to identify key residues and motifs involved in stop codon decoding. As expected, our results demonstrate that 3 pockets within the eRF1 N-terminal domain were involved in decoding stop codon nucleotides. However, allocation of residues to each pocket was revalued. Our data suggest that hydrophobic and class-specific surface residues participate in different functions: modulation of pocket conformation and interaction with stop codon nucleotides, respectively. Residues conserved across all eRF1s determine the relative orientation of the 3 pockets according to stop codon nucleotides. However, quantitative analysis of variant ciliate and yeast eRF1 point mutants did not reveal any correlation between evolutionary conservation of class-specific residues and termination-related functional specificity and was limited in elucidating a detailed mechanism for ciliate stop codon reassignment. Thus, based on isolation of suppressor tRNAs from Euplotes and Tetrahymena, we propose that stop codon reassignment in ciliates may be controlled by cooperation between eRF1 and suppressor tRNAs.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".