Novel modes of RNA editing in mitochondria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gene structure and expression in diplonemid mitochondria are unparalleled. Genes are fragmented in pieces (modules) that are separately transcribed, followed by the joining of module transcripts to contiguous RNAs. Some instances of unique uridine insertion RNA editing at module boundaries were noted, but the extent and potential occurrence of other editing types remained unknown. Comparative analysis of deep transcriptome and genome data from Diplonema papillatum mitochondria reveals ∼220 post-transcriptional insertions of uridines, but no insertions of other nucleotides nor deletions. In addition, we detect in total 114 substitutions of cytosine by uridine and adenosine by inosine, amassed into unusually compact clusters. Inosines in transcripts were confirmed experimentally. This is the first report of adenosine-to-inosine editing of mRNAs and ribosomal RNAs in mitochondria. In mRNAs, editing causes mostly amino-acid additions and non-synonymous substitutions; in ribosomal RNAs, it permits formation of canonical secondary structures. Two extensively edited transcripts were compared across four diplonemids. The pattern of uridine-insertion editing is strictly conserved, whereas substitution editing has diverged dramatically, but still rendering diplonemid proteins more similar to other eukaryotic orthologs. We posit that RNA editing not only compensates but also sustains, or even accelerates, ultra-rapid evolution of genome structure and sequence in diplonemid mitochondria.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".