MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010665163 · doi:10.1101/2020.03.13.991083

Structural and functional conservation of the programmed −1 ribosomal frameshift signal of SARS-CoV-2

2020· preprint· en· W3010665163 on OpenAlexafffund
Jamie A. Kelly, Alexandra N. Olson, Krishna Neupane, Sneha Munshi, Josue San Emeterio, Lois Pollack, Michael T. Woodside, Jonathan D. Dinman

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of EnergyNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsFrameshift mutationPseudoknotTranslational frameshiftBiologyCoronavirusSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Computational biologySmall moleculeVirologyGeneticsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)NucleotideGeneMedicinePhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

17 years after the SARS-CoV epidemic, the world is facing the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 is caused by a coronavirus named SARS-CoV-2. Given the most optimistic projections estimating that it will take over a year to develop a vaccine, the best short-term strategy may lie in identifying virus-specific targets for small molecule interventions. All coronaviruses utilize a molecular mechanism called -1 PRF to control the relative expression of their proteins. Prior analyses of SARS-CoV revealed that it employs a structurally unique three-stemmed mRNA pseudoknot to stimulate high rates of -1 PRF, and that it also harbors a -1 PRF attenuation element. Altering -1 PRF activity negatively impacts virus replication, suggesting that this molecular mechanism may be therapeutically targeted. Here we present a comparative analysis of the original SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 frameshift signals. Structural and functional analyses revealed that both elements promote similar rates of -1 PRF and that silent coding mutations in the slippery sites and in all three stems of the pseudoknot strongly ablated -1 PRF activity. The upstream attenuator hairpin activity has also been functionally retained. Small-angle x-ray scattering indicated that the pseudoknots in SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 had the same conformation. Finally, a small molecule previously shown to bind the SARS-CoV pseudoknot and inhibit -1 PRF was similarly effective against -1 PRF in SARS-CoV-2, suggesting that such frameshift inhibitors may provide promising lead compounds to counter the current pandemic.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 ResearchFrench-language works237,207