RNA interference screens to uncover membrane protein biology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review, we discuss the use of RNA interference screens to identify genes involved in the regulation and function of membrane proteins. Briefly, cells expressing the membrane protein of interest can be transduced with a pooled lentiviral short-hairpin RNA (shRNA) library containing tens of thousands of unique shRNAs. Transduced cells are then selected or fractionated based on specific critera, such as membrane protein expression or function. shRNAs from selected cell populations are then deconvoluted and quantified using microarray analyses or high-throughput sequencing technologies. This allows individual shRNAs to be scored and cutoffs can be made to generate a list of shRNA hits. Bioinformatic analyses of gene targets of shRNA hits can be used to identify pathways and processes associated with membrane protein biology. To illustrate this functional genomics approach, we discuss pooled lentiviral shRNA screens that were performed to identify genes that regulate the transcription and cell-surface expression of the cancer stem cell marker CD133. This approach can be adapted to study other membrane proteins, as well as specific aspects of membrane proteins, such as their function or downstream signaling effects.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it