Large-scale evaluation of the ability of RNA-binding proteins to activate exon inclusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) modulate alternative splicing outcomes to determine isoform expression and cellular survival. To identify RBPs that directly drive alternative exon inclusion, we developed tethered function luciferase-based splicing reporters that provide rapid, scalable and robust readouts of exon inclusion changes and used these to evaluate 718 human RBPs. We performed enhanced cross-linking immunoprecipitation, RNA sequencing and affinity purification-mass spectrometry to investigate a subset of candidates with no prior association with splicing. Integrative analysis of these assays indicates surprising roles for TRNAU1AP, SCAF8 and RTCA in the modulation of hundreds of endogenous splicing events. We also leveraged our tethering assays and top candidates to identify potent and compact exon inclusion activation domains for splicing modulation applications. Using these identified domains, we engineered programmable fusion proteins that outperform current artificial splicing factors at manipulating inclusion of reporter and endogenous exons. This tethering approach characterizes the ability of RBPs to induce exon inclusion and yields new molecular parts for programmable splicing control.
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".