RNA origami design tools enable cotranscriptional folding of kilobase-sized nanoscaffolds
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNA origami is a framework for the modular design of nanoscaffolds that can be folded from a single strand of RNA and used to organize molecular components with nanoscale precision. The design of genetically expressible RNA origami, which must fold cotranscriptionally, requires modelling and design tools that simultaneously consider thermodynamics, the folding pathway, sequence constraints and pseudoknot optimization. Here, we describe RNA Origami Automated Design software (ROAD), which builds origami models from a library of structural modules, identifies potential folding barriers and designs optimized sequences. Using ROAD, we extend the scale and functional diversity of RNA scaffolds, creating 32 designs of up to 2,360 nucleotides, five that scaffold two proteins, and seven that scaffold two small molecules at precise distances. Micrographic and chromatographic comparisons of optimized and non-optimized structures validate that our principles for strand routing and sequence design substantially improve yield. By providing efficient design of RNA origami, ROAD may simplify the construction of custom RNA scaffolds for nanomedicine and synthetic biology. RNA origami can be used for the modular design of RNA nanoscaffolds but can be challenging to design. Newly developed computer-aided design software has now been shown to improve the folding yield of kilobase-sized RNA origami. These structures fold from a single strand during transcription by an RNA polymerase, and are able to position small molecules and protein components with nanoscale precision.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 it