Revealing the hidden <scp>RBP</scp>–<scp>RNA</scp> interactions with <scp>RNA</scp> modification enzyme‐based strategies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) are powerful and versatile regulators in living creatures, playing fundamental roles in organismal development, metabolism, and various diseases by the regulation of gene expression at multiple levels. The requirements of deep research on RBP function have promoted the rapid development of RBP-RNA interplay detection methods. Recently, the detection method of fusing RNA modification enzymes (RME) with RBP of interest has become a hot topic. Here, we reviewed RNA modification enzymes in adenosine deaminases that act on RNA (ADAR), terminal nucleotidyl transferase (TENT), and activation-induced cytosine deaminase/ApoB mRNA editing enzyme catalytic polypeptide-like (AID/APOBEC) protein family, regarding the biological function, biochemical activity, and substrate specificity originated from enzyme selves, their domains and partner proteins. In addition, we discussed the RME activity screening system, and the RME mutations with engineered enzyme activity. Furthermore, we provided a systematic overview of the basic principles, advantages, disadvantages, and applications of the RME-based and cross-linking and immunopurification (CLIP)-based RBP target profiling strategies, including targets of RNA-binding proteins identified by editing (TRIBE), RNA tagging, surveying targets by APOBEC-mediated profiling (STAMP), CLIP-seq, and their derivative technology. This article is categorized under: RNA Interactions with Proteins and Other Molecules > Protein-RNA Recognition RNA Processing > RNA Editing and Modification.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it