MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158375643 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2015.09.068

The Crystal Structure of the NHL Domain in Complex with RNA Reveals the Molecular Basis of Drosophila Brain-Tumor-Mediated Gene Regulation

2015· article· en· W2158375643 on OpenAlexafffund
Inga Loedige, Leonhard Jakob, Thomas Treiber, Debashish Ray, Mathias Stotz, Nora Treiber, Janosch Hennig, Kate B. Cook, Quaid Morris, Timothy R. Hughes, Julia C. Engelmann, Michael P. Krahn, Gunter Meister

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHelmholtz-Zentrum Berlin für Materialien und EnergieDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsRNA-binding proteinBiologyRNARepressorCell biologyYY1RNA recognition motifGeneMolecular biologyGeneticsGene expressionPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TRIM-NHL proteins are conserved among metazoans and control cell fate decisions in various stem cell linages. The Drosophila TRIM-NHL protein Brain tumor (Brat) directs differentiation of neuronal stem cells by suppressing self-renewal factors. Brat is an RNA-binding protein and functions as a translational repressor. However, it is unknown which RNAs Brat regulates and how RNA-binding specificity is achieved. Using RNA immunoprecipitation and RNAcompete, we identify Brat-bound mRNAs in Drosophila embryos and define consensus binding motifs for Brat as well as a number of additional TRIM-NHL proteins, indicating that TRIM-NHL proteins are conserved, sequence-specific RNA-binding proteins. We demonstrate that Brat-mediated repression and direct RNA-binding depend on the identified motif and show that binding of the localization factor Miranda to the Brat-NHL domain inhibits Brat activity. Finally, to unravel the sequence specificity of the NHL domain, we crystallize the Brat-NHL domain in complex with RNA and present a high-resolution protein-RNA structure of this fold.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations103
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207