MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169531456 · doi:10.1242/jcs.168583

mRNA encoding Sec61β, a tail-anchored protein, is localized on the endoplasmic reticulum

2015· article· en· W2169531456 on OpenAlexaff
Xianying A. Cui, Hui Zhang, Lena Ilan, Ai Xin Liu, Iryna Кharchuk, Alexander F. Palazzo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndoplasmic reticulumBiologyCell biologyTransloconRibosomeTranslation (biology)Messenger RNASec61Transmembrane proteinSTIM1Membrane proteinSecretory pathwayReceptorGeneBiochemistryGolgi apparatusRNAMembrane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although one pathway for the post-translational targeting of tail-anchored proteins to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) has been well defined, it is unclear whether additional pathways exist. Here, we provide evidence that a subset of mRNAs encoding tail-anchored proteins, including Sec61β and nesprin-2, is partially localized to the surface of the ER in mammalian cells. In particular, Sec61b mRNA can be targeted to, and later maintained on, the ER using both translation-dependent and -independent mechanisms. Our data suggests that this process is independent of p180 (also known as RRBP1), a known mRNA receptor on the ER, and the transmembrane domain recognition complex (TRC) pathway components, TRC40 (also known as ASNA1) and BAT3 (also known as BAG6). In addition, our data indicates that Sec61b mRNA might access translocon-bound ribosomes. Our results show that certain tail-anchored proteins are likely to be synthesized directly on the ER, and this facilitates their membrane insertion. Thus, it is clear that mammalian cells utilize multiple mechanisms to ensure efficient targeting of tail-anchored proteins to the surface of the ER.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207