MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291351508 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkw140

Introns regulate the production of ribosomal proteins by modulating splicing of duplicated ribosomal protein genes

2016· article· en· W2291351508 on OpenAlexaff
Cyrielle Petibon, Julie Parenteau, Mathieu Catala, Sherif Abou Elela

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyIntronRibosomal proteinRibosomal RNARNA splicingGeneticsGeneRibosomal DNA5S ribosomal RNARibosomeComputational biology18S ribosomal RNARNAPhylogenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most budding yeast introns exist in the many duplicated ribosomal protein genes (RPGs) and it has been posited that they remain there to modulate the expression of RPGs and cell growth in response to stress. However, the mechanism by which introns regulate the expression of RPGs and their impact on the synthesis of ribosomal proteins remain unclear. In this study, we show that introns determine the ratio of ribosomal protein isoforms through asymmetric paralog-specific regulation of splicing. Exchanging the introns and 3' untranslated regions of the duplicated RPS9 genes altered the splicing efficiency and changed the ratio of the ribosomal protein isoforms. Mutational analysis of the RPS9 genes indicated that splicing is regulated by variations in the intron structure and the 3' untranslated region. Together these data suggest that preferential splicing of duplicated RPGs provides a means for adjusting the ratio of different ribosomal protein isoforms, while maintaining the overall expression level of each ribosomal protein.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.292
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 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

Citations58
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207