MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2412937939 · doi:10.1007/978-1-60327-475-3_10

In Vivo Analysis of Ribonucleoprotein Complexes Using Nucleotide Analog Interference Mapping

2008· article· en· W2412937939 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lara Szewczak

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science FoundationDamon Runyon Cancer Research FoundationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMedical Research CouncilAlberta Heritage Foundation for Medical ResearchFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungBeckman Research Institute, City of HopeU.S. Department of DefenseSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsSpliceosomeRibonucleoproteinComputational biologyRNACell biologyXenopusBiologyIn vitroNucleotideRNA interferenceChemistryPopulationBiochemistryIn vivoGeneBiophysicsGeneticsRNA splicing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multicomponent RNA-protein complexes are essential for eukaryotic gene expression. Some, like the spliceosome, have been studied successfully in vitro using biochemical and structural approaches, but many have not been reconstituted in cell-free systems. Nucleotide analog interference mapping (NAIM) can report detailed atomic information about requirements for ribonucleoprotein particle assembly and function in living cells, providing a method to study complexes in a cellular context at a level of detail comparable to many biochemical assays. The method relies on incorporation of phosphorothioate-tagged nucleotide analogs during in vitro transcription, followed by a selection for the active population of molecules and analysis of the selected RNA sequence composition. Xenopus oocytes provide a cellular environment for selecting active molecules based on particle assembly or function. Functional group analysis of complexes assembled in vivo provides predictive models for further investigation either in vivo or in vitro as well as benchmarks for evaluating and refining biochemical and structural models.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→