A human-Tetrahymena pseudoknot chimeric telomerase RNA reconstitutes a nonprocessive enzyme in vitro that is defective in telomere elongation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phylogenetically-derived secondary structures of telomerase RNAs (TR) from ciliates, yeasts and vertebrates are surprisingly conserved and contain a pseudoknot domain at a similar location downstream of the template. As the pseudoknot domains of Tetrahymena TR (tTR) and human TR (hTR) mediate certain similar functions, we hypothesized that they might be functionally interchangeable. We constructed a chimeric TR (htTR) by exchanging the hTR pseudoknot sequences for the tTR pseudoknot region. The chimeric RNA reconstituted human telomerase activity when coexpressed with hTERT in vitro, but exhibited defects in repeat addition processivity and levels of DNA synthesis compared to hTR. Activity was dependent on tTR sequences within the chimeric RNA. htTR interacted with hTERT in vitro and dimerized predominantly via a region of its hTR backbone, the J7b/8a loop. Introduction of htTR in telomerase-negative cells stably expressing hTERT did not reconstitute an active enzyme able to elongate telomeres. Thus, our results indicate that the chimeric RNA reconstituted a weakly active nonprocessive human telomerase enzyme in vitro that was defective in telomere elongation in vivo. This suggests that there may be species-specific requirements for pseudoknot functions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".