Searching for IRES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cell has many ways to regulate the production of proteins. One mechanism is through the changes to the machinery of translation initiation. These alterations favor the translation of one subset of mRNAs over another. It was first shown that internal ribosome entry sites (IRESes) within viral RNA genomes allowed the production of viral proteins more efficiently than most of the host proteins. The RNA secondary structure of viral IRESes has sometimes been conserved between viral species even though the primary sequences differ. These structures are important for IRES function, but no similar structure conservation has yet to be shown in cellular IRES. With the advances in mathematical modeling and computational approaches to complex biological problems, is there a way to predict an IRES in a data set of unknown sequences? This review examines what is known about cellular IRES structures, as well as the data sets and tools available to examine this question. We find that the lengths, number of upstream AUGs, and %GC content of 5'-UTRs of the human transcriptome have a similar distribution to those of published IRES-containing UTRs. Although the UTRs containing IRESes are on the average longer, almost half of all 5'-UTRs are long enough to contain an IRES. Examination of the available RNA structure prediction software and RNA motif searching programs indicates that while these programs are useful tools to fine tune the empirically determined RNA secondary structure, the accuracy of de novo secondary structure prediction of large RNA molecules and subsequent identification of new IRES elements by computational approaches, is still not possible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.009 |
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".