Predicting synonymous codon usage and optimizing the heterologous gene for expression in E. coli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of the 20 common amino acids, 18 are encoded by multiple synonymous codons. These synonymous codons are not redundant; in fact, all of codons contribute substantially to protein expression, structure and function. In this study, the codon usage pattern of genes in the E. coli was learned from the sequenced genomes of E. coli. A machine learning based method, Presyncodon was proposed to predict synonymous codon selection in E. coli based on the learned codon usage patterns of the residue in the context of the specific fragment. The predicting results indicate that Presycoden could be used to predict synonymous codon selection of the gene in the E. coli with the high accuracy. Two reporter genes (egfp and mApple) were designed with a combination of low- and high-frequency-usage codons by the method. The fluorescence intensity of eGFP and mApple expressed by the (egfp and mApple) designed by this method was about 2.3- or 1.7- folds greater than that from the genes with only high-frequency-usage codons in E. coli. Therefore, both low- and high-frequency-usage codons make positive contributions to the functional expression of the heterologous proteins. This method could be used to design synthetic genes for heterologous gene expression in biotechnology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".