MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319763493 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2023.1089053

Re-evaluating the impact of alternative RNA splicing on proteomic diversity

2023· review· en· W4319763493 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeru Manoj Manuel, Noé Guilloy, Inès Khatir, Xavier Roucou, Benoît Laurent

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related molecular mechanisms research
Canadian institutionsPROTEOCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of SydneyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsAlternative splicingComputational biologyBiologyProteomeProteomicsRNA splicingProteogenomicsGeneGenomeENCODETranscriptomeHuman proteome projectRNAProtein isoformHuman genomeGeneticsGene isoformGenomicsGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alternative splicing (AS) constitutes a mechanism by which protein-coding genes and long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) genes produce more than a single mature transcript. From plants to humans, AS is a powerful process that increases transcriptome complexity. Importantly, splice variants produced from AS can potentially encode for distinct protein isoforms which can lose or gain specific domains and, hence, differ in their functional properties. Advances in proteomics have shown that the proteome is indeed diverse due to the presence of numerous protein isoforms. For the past decades, with the help of advanced high-throughput technologies, numerous alternatively spliced transcripts have been identified. However, the low detection rate of protein isoforms in proteomic studies raised debatable questions on whether AS contributes to proteomic diversity and on how many AS events are really functional. We propose here to assess and discuss the impact of AS on proteomic complexity in the light of the technological progress, updated genome annotation, and current scientific knowledge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicCancer-related molecular mechanisms researchFrench-language works237,207