Improving the prediction accuracy of protein abundance in Escherichia coli using mRNA accessibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNA secondary structure around translation initiation sites strongly affects the abundance of expressed proteins in Escherichia coli. However, detailed secondary structural features governing protein abundance remain elusive. Recent advances in high-throughput DNA synthesis and experimental systems enable us to obtain large amounts of data. Here, we evaluated six types of structural features using two large-scale datasets. We found that accessibility, which is the probability that a given region around the start codon has no base-paired nucleotides, showed the highest correlation with protein abundance in both datasets. Accessibility showed a significantly higher correlation (Spearman's ρ = 0.709) than the widely used minimum free energy (0.554) in one of the datasets. Interestingly, accessibility showed the highest correlation only when it was calculated by a log-linear model, indicating that the RNA structural model and how to utilize it are important. Furthermore, by combining the accessibility and activity of the Shine-Dalgarno sequence, we devised a method for predicting protein abundance more accurately than existing methods. We inferred that the log-linear model has a broader probabilistic distribution than the widely used Turner energy model, which contributed to more accurate quantification of ribosome accessibility to translation initiation sites.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".