The cryo-EM structure of YjeQ bound to the 30S subunit suggests a fidelity checkpoint function for this protein in ribosome assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work suggests that bacterial YjeQ (RsgA) participates in the late stages of assembly of the 30S subunit and aids the assembly of the decoding center but also binds the mature 30S subunit with high affinity. To determine the function and mechanisms of YjeQ in the context of the mature subunit, we determined the cryo-EM structure of the fully assembled 30S subunit in complex with YjeQ at 5.8-Å resolution. We found that binding of YjeQ stabilizes helix 44 into a conformation similar to that adopted by the subunit during proofreading. This finding indicates that, along with acting as an assembly factor, YjeQ has a role as a checkpoint protein, consisting of testing the proofreading ability of the 30S subunit. The structure also informs the mechanism by which YjeQ implements the release from the 30S subunit of a second assembly factor, called RbfA. Finally, it reveals how the 30S subunit stimulates YjeQ GTPase activity and leads to release of the protein. Checkpoint functions have been described for eukaryotic ribosome assembly factors; however, this work describes an example of a bacterial assembly factor that tests a specific translation mechanism of the 30S subunit.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".