RPL3L-containing ribosomes determine translation elongation dynamics required for cardiac function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although several ribosomal protein paralogs are expressed in a tissue-specific manner, how these proteins affect translation and why they are required only in certain tissues have remained unclear. Here we show that RPL3L, a paralog of RPL3 specifically expressed in heart and skeletal muscle, influences translation elongation dynamics. Deficiency of RPL3L-containing ribosomes in RPL3L knockout male mice resulted in impaired cardiac contractility. Ribosome occupancy at mRNA codons was found to be altered in the RPL3L-deficient heart, and the changes were negatively correlated with those observed in myoblasts overexpressing RPL3L. RPL3L-containing ribosomes were less prone to collisions compared with RPL3-containing canonical ribosomes. Although the loss of RPL3L-containing ribosomes altered translation elongation dynamics for the entire transcriptome, its effects were most pronounced for transcripts related to cardiac muscle contraction and dilated cardiomyopathy, with the abundance of the encoded proteins being correspondingly decreased. Our results provide further insight into the mechanisms and physiological relevance of tissue-specific translational 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".