MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111279221 · doi:10.1016/j.xpro.2020.100229

Quantification of mRNA ribosomal engagement in human neurons using parallel translating ribosome affinity purification (TRAP) and RNA sequencing

2020· article· en· W3111279221 on OpenAlexafffund
Deivid C. Rodrigues, Marat Mufteev, James Ellis

Bibliographic record

VenueSTAR Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada First Research Excellence FundOntario Institute for Regenerative MedicineOntario Brain Institute
KeywordsRibosomeRibosomal RNATranslation (biology)RNARibosome profiling5.8S ribosomal RNAMessenger RNABiologyComputational biologyRibosomal binding siteCell biologyTranscriptomeRibosomal proteinMolecular biologyGeneGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Translation regulation is a fundamental step in gene regulation with critical roles in neurodevelopment. Here, we describe three protocols to calculate the ribosomal-engagement levels of the transcriptome from in vitro-derived neuronal cells. The protocols described here include enrichment of in vitro-generated pluripotent-derived neurons, immunoaffinity purification of ribosome-bound RNAs, and calculation of the fraction of ribosome-engaged mRNAs. The ribosome-engaged RNA fraction is a measurement of the translation activity, and differences between genotype or growth conditions report change in translational regulation. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Rodrigues et al. (2020).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTAR ProtocolsSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207