MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135563942 · doi:10.1093/bfgp/elt022

RNA interference screens to uncover membrane protein biology

2013· review· en· W2135563942 on OpenAlexafffund
Anthony B. Mak, Jason Moffat

Bibliographic record

VenueBriefings in Functional Genomics · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSmall hairpin RNABiologyRNA interferenceComputational biologyRNAGeneCell biologyFunctional genomicsMembrane proteinGenomicsGeneticsGenomeMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBriefings in Functional GenomicsSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207