MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Relationship between RNA splicing and exon editing near intron junctions in wheat mitochondria

2006· article· en· W2095509362 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Li‐Pook‐Than, Catherine D. Carrillo, Nima Niknejad, Sophie Calixte, Jennifer Crosthwait, Linda Bonen

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiologia Plantarum · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExonIntronRNA editingRNA splicingBiologyRNAExon trappingGeneticsGroup II intronGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have compared the RNA editing status of wheat mitochondrial unspliced precursor transcripts with spliced RNAs, focusing in particular on exon editing sites located very close to intron/exon junctions. Using direct sequencing of reverse transcriptase–PCR products to assess C‐to‐U editing in various RNA populations for the respiratory chain genes nad2 , nad4 , nad5 , nad7 , and cox2 , we observed that candidate exon sites immediately upstream or downstream of introns remained unedited in the presence of the adjacent intron, whereas sites further away were typically partially (or completely) edited in precursor molecules. The ‘late’ editing of exon sites adjacent to splice junctions is consistent with access of the editing machinery being sterically hindered by the intron or alternatively by an editing recognition element being created by the exon/exon structure. When we examined RNA isolated from the embryo‐to‐seedling stages of wheat development, we found that fully spliced messenger RNAs showed editing at the expected sites in all stages, including dormant seeds. In contrast, we observed that cox2 precursors were less completely edited in RNA populations from 0 to 24 h postimbibition embryos than in 6‐day‐old seedlings not only at splice junctions but also at other exon sites, consistent with more efficient coupling between editing and transcription during later stages of development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiologia PlantarumSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207