A cellular response linking eIF4AI activity to eIF4AII transcription
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recruitment of ribosomes to eukaryotic cellular mRNAs requires the activity of two prototypic RNA helicases, eukaryotic initiation factor (eIF) 4AI and eIF4AII. The eIF4A isoforms are highly conserved, are thought to be functionally interchangeable, and are directed to the 5' m(7)GpppN cap structure of mRNAs during translation initiation by virtue of their assembly into eIF4F, a heterotrimeric complex that also harbors the eIF4E cap binding protein and eIF4G scaffolding unit. During the course of RNA interference experiments aimed at investigating the respective roles of eIF4AI and eIF4AII in translation, we uncovered a cellular response pathway whereby suppression of eIF4AI increases transcription of the eIF4AII gene, leading to elevated eIF4AII mRNA and protein levels. Inhibition of eIF4AI suppresses protein synthesis, and although eIF4AII protein levels increase above and beyond what should be sufficient to compensate for the decrease in eIF4AI levels, there is no corresponding rescue of translation or of the block on cellular proliferation that occurs upon eIF4AI suppression. These results were phenocopied using the small molecule eIF4A inhibitor hippuristanol. Taken together, our results indicate that eIF4AI and eIF4AII expression appear linked and that the two protein isoforms exhibit functional differences.
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 | 0.000 |
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".