Small RNAs beyond Model Organisms: Have We Only Scratched the Surface?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Small RNAs (sRNAs) are essential regulators in the adaptation of bacteria to environmental changes and act by binding targeted mRNAs through base complementarity. Approximately 550 distinct families of sRNAs have been identified since their initial characterization in the 1980s, accelerated by the emergence of RNA-sequencing. Small RNAs are found in a wide range of bacterial phyla, but they are more prominent in highly researched model organisms compared to the rest of the sequenced bacteria. Indeed, Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica contain the highest number of sRNAs, with 98 and 118, respectively, with Enterobacteriaceae encoding 145 distinct sRNAs, while other bacteria families have only seven sRNAs on average. Although the past years brought major advances in research on sRNAs, we have perhaps only scratched the surface, even more so considering RNA annotations trail behind gene annotations. A distinctive trend can be observed for genes, whereby their number increases with genome size, but this is not observable for RNAs, although they would be expected to follow the same trend. In this perspective, we aimed at establishing a more accurate representation of the occurrence of sRNAs in bacteria, emphasizing the potential for novel sRNA discoveries.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".