Binding to the conserved and stably folded guide RNA pseudoknot induces Cas12a conformational changes during ribonucleoprotein assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ribonucleoproteins (RNPs) comprise one or more RNA and protein molecules that interact to form a stable complex, which commonly involves conformational changes in the more flexible RNA components. Here, we propose that Cas12a RNP assembly with its cognate CRISPR RNA (crRNA) guide instead proceeds primarily through Cas12a conformational changes during binding to more stable, prefolded crRNA 5' pseudoknot handles. Phylogenetic reconstructions and sequence and structure alignments revealed that the Cas12a proteins are divergent in sequence and structure while the crRNA 5' repeat region, which folds into a pseudoknot and anchors binding to Cas12a, is highly conserved. Molecular dynamics simulations of three Cas12a proteins and their cognate guides revealed substantial flexibility for unbound apo-Cas12a. In contrast, crRNA 5' pseudoknots were predicted to be stable and independently folded. Limited trypsin hydrolysis, differential scanning fluorimetry, thermal denaturation, and CD analyses supported conformational changes of Cas12a during RNP assembly and an independently folded crRNA 5' pseudoknot. This RNP assembly mechanism may be rationalized by evolutionary pressure to conserve CRISPR loci repeat sequence, and therefore guide RNA structure, to maintain function across all phases of the CRISPR defense mechanism.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".