A kinetic dichotomy between mitochondrial and nuclear gene expression drives OXPHOS biogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) complexes, encoded by both mitochondrial and nuclear DNA, are essential producers of cellular ATP, but how nuclear and mitochondrial gene expression steps are coordinated to achieve balanced OXPHOS biogenesis remains unresolved. Here, we present a parallel quantitative analysis of the human nuclear and mitochondrial messenger RNA (mt-mRNA) life cycles, including transcript production, processing, ribosome association, and degradation. The kinetic rates of nearly every stage of gene expression differed starkly across compartments. Compared to nuclear mRNAs, mt-mRNAs were produced 700-fold higher, degraded 5-fold faster, and accumulated to 170-fold higher levels. Quantitative modeling and depletion of mitochondrial factors, LRPPRC and FASTKD5, identified critical points of mitochondrial regulatory control, revealing that the mitonuclear expression disparities intrinsically arise from the highly polycistronic nature of human mitochondrial pre-mRNA. We propose that resolving these differences requires a 100-fold slower mitochondrial translation rate, illuminating the mitoribosome as a nexus of mitonuclear co-regulation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".