MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2626420923 · doi:10.1101/149195

DRUID: A pipeline for reproducible transcriptome-wide measurements of mRNA stability

2017· preprint· en· W2626420923 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Lugowski, Beth Nicholson, Olivia S. Rissland

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2017
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTranscriptomeNormalization (sociology)Pipeline (software)Computational biologyIntronRNA-SeqMessenger RNABiologyComputer scienceGeneBioinformaticsGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Control of messenger RNA (mRNA) stability is an important aspect of gene regulation. The gold standard for measuring mRNA stability transcriptome-wide uses metabolic labeling, biochemical isolation of labeled RNA populations, and high-throughput sequencing. However, difficult normalization procedures and complex computational algorithms have inhibited widespread adoption of this approach. Here, we present DRUID (for Determination of Rates Using Intron Dynamics), a computational pipeline that is robust, easy to use, and freely available. Our pipeline uses endogenous introns to normalize time course data and yields more reproducible half-lives than other methods, even with datasets that were otherwise unusable. DRUID can handle datasets from a variety of organisms, spanning yeast to humans, and we even applied it retroactively on published datasets. We anticipate that DRUID will allow broad application of metabolic labeling for studies of mRNA stability.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.010

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms→French-language works237,207→