ReViTA: A novel in vitro transcription system to study gene regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ReViTA (Reverse in Vitro Transcription Assay) is a novel in vitro transcription-based method to study gene expression under the regulation of specific transcription factors. The ReViTA system uses a plasmid with a control sequence, the promoter region of the studied gene, the transcription factor of interest, and an RNA polymerase saturated with σ70. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the method; thus, as a proof of concept, two different transcription factors were used, a transcriptional inducer, AlgR, and a repressor, LexA, from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. After the promoters were incubated with the transcription factors, the plasmid was transcribed into RNA and reverse transcribed to cDNA. Gene expression was measured using qRTPCR. Using the ReViTA plasmid, transcription induction of 55% was observed when AlgR protein was added and a 27% transcription reduction with the repressor LexA, compared with the samples without transcription factors. The results demonstrated the correct functioning of ReViTA as a novel method to study transcription factors and gene expression. Thus, ReViTA could be a rapid and accessible in vitro method to evaluate genes and regulators of various species.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".