An <i>in vivo</i> parallelized reporter assay to uncover tissue-specific splicing regulatory sequences in a multicellular animal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introns play a critical role in regulating alternative splicing. However, identifying functional intronic motifs is challenging due to their short and degenerate sequence composition. Massively parallel reporter assays have provided insights into cis -regulatory logic governing alternative splicing, but these approaches are generally performed in cell culture, limiting their ability to capture tissue-specific contexts. Here, we implemented in vivo Parallelized Reporter Assays in C. elegans neurons and muscle cells to screen for intronic enhancer and silencer motifs among thousands of randomized sequences. We identified nearly 200 sequences regulating splicing in these tissues. We uncovered core sub-sequences with tissue-biased enhancing and silencing activity, including motifs recognized by well-characterized RNA-binding proteins, and orphan motifs with no obvious cognate binding protein. Mapping our PRA-derived motifs to native introns flanking tissue-biased alternative exons revealed their conservation across nematodes, supporting their functional relevance. Additionally, individual intronic regions frequently contained diverse combinations of these motifs, indicative of complex engagement of these sequences by RNA-binding proteins. Finally, we performed targeted mutagenesis of PRA-derived intronic enhancers flanking a neuronal microexon, identifying key cis -regulatory determinants of microexon splicing. Together, our study provides a framework to explore the role of intronic regions in tissue-specific splicing regulation within a multicellular organism. Graphical Abstract
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".