Conformational dynamics of the frameshift stimulatory structure in HIV-1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Programmed ribosomal frameshifting (PRF) in HIV-1 is thought to be stimulated by a hairpin in the mRNA, although a pseudoknot-like triplex has also been proposed. Because the conformational dynamics of the stimulatory structure under tension applied by the ribosomal helicase during translation may play an important role in PRF, we used optical tweezers to apply tension to the HIV stimulatory structure and monitor its unfolding and refolding dynamics. The folding and unfolding kinetics and energy landscape of the hairpin were measured by ramping the force on the hairpin up and down, providing a detailed biophysical characterization. Unexpectedly, whereas unfolding reflected the simple two-state behavior typical of many hairpins, refolding was more complex, displaying significant heterogeneity. Evidence was found for multiple refolding pathways as well as previously unsuspected, partially folded intermediates. Measuring a variant mRNA containing only the sequence required to form the proposed triplex, it behaved largely in the same way. Nonetheless, very rarely, high-force unfolding events characteristic of pseudoknot-like structures were observed. The rare occurrence of the triplex suggests that the hairpin is the functional stimulatory structure. The unusual heterogeneity of the hairpin dynamics under tension suggests a possible functional role in PRF similar to the dynamics of other stimulatory structures.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".