Solution structure of an arabinonucleic acid (ANA)/RNA duplex in a chimeric hairpin: comparison with 2'-fluoro-ANA/RNA and DNA/RNA hybrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybrids of RNA and arabinonucleic acid (ANA) as well as the 2'-fluoro-ANA analog (2'F-ANA) were recently shown to be substrates of the enzyme RNase H. Although RNase H binds to double-stranded RNA, no cleavage occurs with such duplexes. Therefore, knowledge of the structure of ANA/RNA hybrids may prove helpful in the design of future antisense oligonucleotide analogs. In this study, we have determined the NMR solution structures of ANA/RNA and DNA/RNA hairpin duplexes and compared them to the recently published structure of a 2'F-ANA/RNA hairpin duplex. We demonstrate here that the sugars of RNA nucleotides of the ANA/RNA hairpin stem adopt the C3'-endo (north, A-form) conformation, whereas those of the ANA strand adopt a 'rigid' O4'-endo (east) sugar pucker. The DNA strand of the DNA/RNA hairpin stem is flexible, but the average DNA/RNA hairpin structural parameters are close to the ANA/RNA and 2'F-ANA/RNA hairpin parameters. The minor groove width of ANA/RNA, 2'F-ANA/RNA and DNA/RNA helices is 9.0 +/- 0.5 A, a value that is intermediate between that of A- and B-form duplexes. These results rationalize the ability of ANA/RNA and 2'F-ANA/RNA hybrids to elicit RNase H activity.
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) | 0.001 | 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".