CRD-BP shields c-myc and MDR-1 RNA from endonucleolytic attack by a mammalian endoribonuclease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The c-myc mRNA coding region determinant-binding protein (CRD-BP) has high affinity for the coding region determinant (CRD) of c-myc mRNA. Such affinity is believed to protect c-myc CRD from endonucleolytic attack. We have recently purified a mammalian endoribonuclease which can cleave within the c-myc CRD in vitro. The availability of this purified endonuclease has made it possible to directly test the interaction between CRD-BP and the endonuclease in regulating c-myc CRD RNA cleavage. In this study, we have identified the coding region of MDR-1 RNA as a new target for CRD-BP. CRD-BP has the same affinity for c-myc CRD nts 1705-1886 and MDR-1 RNA nts 746-962 with K(d) of 500 nM. The concentration-dependent affinity of CRD-BP to these transcripts correlated with the concentration-dependent blocking of endonuclease-mediated cleavage by CRD-BP. In contrast, three other recombinant proteins tested which had no affinity for c-myc CRD did not block endonuclease-mediated cleavage. Finally, we have identified RNA sequences required for CRD-BP binding. These results provide the first direct evidence that CRD-BP can indeed protect c-myc CRD cleavage initiated by an endoribonuclease, and the framework for further investigation into the interactions between CRD-BP, c-myc mRNA, MDR-1 mRNA and the endoribonuclease in cells.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".