Faculty Opinions recommendation of A drug-controllable tag for visualizing newly synthesized proteins in cells and whole animals.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on basic cellular processes involving local production or delivery of proteins, such as activity-dependent synaptic modification in neurons, would benefit greatly from a robust, nontoxic method to visualize selectively newly synthesized copies of proteins of interest within cells, tissues, or animals. We report a technique for covalent labeling of newly synthesized proteins of interest based on drug-dependent preservation of epitope tags. Epitope tags are removed from proteins of interest immediately after translation by the activity of a sequence-specific protease until the time a protease inhibitor is added, after which newly synthesized protein copies retain their tags. This method, which we call TimeSTAMP for time-specific tagging for the age measurement of proteins, allows sensitive and nonperturbative visualization and quantification of newly synthesized proteins of interest with exceptionally tight temporal control. We demonstrate applications of TimeSTAMP in retrospectively identifying growing synapses in cultured neurons and in visualizing the distribution of recently synthesized proteins in intact fly brains. PMID: 18511556 Funding information This work was supported by: Howard Hughes Medical Institute, United States
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".