MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410231660 · doi:10.1261/rna.080359.124

Alu RNA pseudoknot alterations influence SRP9/SRP14 association

2025· article· en· W4410231660 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Gussakovsky, Mira J.F. Brown, Higor Sette Pereira, Markus Meier, Evan P. Booy, Jörg Stetefeld, Trushar R. Patel, Sean A. McKenna

Bibliographic record

VenueRNA · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPseudoknotBiologyAlu elementRNAGeneticsSignal recognition particle RNANon-coding RNARNA silencingHuman genomeComputational biologyGenomeGeneRNA interference

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are over 1 million Alu elements in the human genome which can be transcribed into discrete, RNA polymerase III transcribed noncoding Alu RNAs. These Alu RNAs often interact with and are regulated by the protein heterodimer SRP9/SRP14. This interaction is dependent on a 5' pseudoknot domain in the Alu RNA that is thought to be held together by a canonical nucleotide triad within a U-turn motif. Herein, we discover a significant reduction in BC200 expression after mutation of a critical guanosine in the U-turn motif within its pseudoknot domain. We studied a recently discovered short human Alu RNA, EB120, which lacks the canonical Alu RNA U-turn nucleotide triad. We tested the expression of EB120 in 18 different human cell lines and tissues. EB120 was found to lack association with SRP9/SRP14 in a cellular context. Small-angle X-ray scattering followed by atomistic computation structure prediction suggests the BC200 Alu domain and its U-turn mutant both possess a canonical Alu RNA fold, while EB120 lacks one. Our results highlight the structural diversity of Alu RNA, and the impact mutations may have on Alu RNA function.

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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.247
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRNASame topicRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsFrench-language works237,207