MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145684688 · doi:10.1261/rna.453107

Weak binding affinity of human 4EHP for mRNA cap analogs

2007· article· en· W2145684688 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Zuberek, Dorota Kubacka, Agnieszka Jabłonowska, Jacek Jemielity, Janusz Stȩpiński, Nahum Sonenberg, Edward Darżynkiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueRNA · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEIF4EEIF4GBiologyTranslation (biology)Messenger RNAEukaryotic translationRibosomeRibosomal binding siteProtein biosynthesisInternal ribosome entry siteBinding siteCell biologyBiochemistryMolecular biologyRNAGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ribosome recruitment to the majority of eukaryotic mRNAs is facilitated by the interaction of the cap binding protein, eIF4E, with the mRNA 5' cap structure. eIF4E stimulates translation through its interaction with a scaffolding protein, eIF4G, which helps to recruit the ribosome. Metazoans also contain a homolog of eIF4E, termed 4EHP, which binds the cap structure, but not eIF4G, and thus cannot stimulate translation, but it instead inhibits the translation of only one known, and possibly subset mRNAs. To understand why 4EHP does not inhibit general translation, we studied the binding affinity of 4EHP for cap analogs using two methods: fluorescence titration and stopped-flow measurements. We show that 4EHP binds cap analogs m(7)GpppG and m(7)GTP with 30 and 100 lower affinity than eIF4E. Thus, 4EHP cannot compete with eIF4E for binding to the cap structure of most mRNAs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations76
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRNASame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207