MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384817668 · doi:10.1016/j.biochi.2023.07.014

Development of a highly optimized procedure for the discovery of RNA G-quadruplexes by combining several strategies

2023· article· en· W4384817668 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc-Antoine Turcotte, François Bolduc, Anaïs Vannutelli, Jérémie Mitteaux, David Monchaud, Jean‐Pierre Perreault

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochimie · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Nucleic Acid Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNechako-Kitamaat Development Fund SocietyFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesUniversité de SherbrookeEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsRNAComputational biologyBiologyTranscriptomeG-quadruplexNucleic acidGeneticsDNAGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RNA G-quadruplexes (rG4s) are non-canonical secondary structures that are formed by the self-association of guanine quartets and that are stabilized by monovalent cations (e.g. potassium). rG4s are key elements in several post-transcriptional regulation mechanisms, including both messenger RNA (mRNA) and microRNA processing, mRNA transport and translation, to name but a few examples. Over the past few years, multiple high-throughput approaches have been developed in order to identify rG4s, including bioinformatic prediction, in vitro assays and affinity capture experiments coupled to RNA sequencing. Each individual approach had its limits, and thus yielded only a fraction of the potential rG4 that are further confirmed (i.e., there is a significant level of false positive). This report aims to benefit from the strengths of several existing approaches to identify rG4s with a high potential of being folded in cells. Briefly, rG4s were pulled-down from cell lysates using the biotinylated biomimetic G4 ligand BioTASQ and the sequences thus isolated were then identified by RNA sequencing. Then, a novel bioinformatic pipeline that included DESeq2 to identify rG4 enriched transcripts, MACS2 to identify rG4 peaks, rG4-seq to increase rG4 formation probability and G4RNA Screener to detect putative rG4s was performed. This workflow uncovers new rG4 candidates whose rG4-folding was then confirmed in vitro using an array of established biophysical methods. Clearly, this workflow led to the identification of novel rG4s in a highly specific and reliable manner.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochimieSame topicDNA and Nucleic Acid ChemistryFrench-language works237,207