Conserved Functions of <scp>LARP1</scp> Proteins in Eukaryotes
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
ABSTRACT La and La‐related proteins (LARPs) are conserved RNA‐binding proteins that share a characteristic La motif (LaM) and have important functions in RNA metabolism. Members of the LARP1 family bind a cohort of mRNAs encoding factors involved in the process of mRNA translation, including ribosomal protein mRNAs (RP mRNAs). These mRNAs can contain a sequence of 5–15 pyrimidines in their 5′UTRs, immediately following the m 7 G cap, and are named 5′ terminal oligopyrimidine (5′TOP) mRNAs. The DM15 domain of human LARP1 has been suggested to specifically recognize this motif, thereby affecting 5′TOP mRNA translation and stability. However, the specific function of LARP1 in this context remains unclear. Intriguingly, the 5′TOP motif is not found in RP mRNAs in C. elegans and yeast, while LARP1 orthologs in some systems lack the characteristic DM15 domain, suggesting that essential functions of LARP1 family members may precede the emergence of the 5′TOP motif and the DM15. In this work, we review studies in humans and several model organisms where we draw parallels between reported RNA binding modes and functions of different LARP1 orthologs. We further present common themes and areas for further investigation. This article is categorized under: RNA Interactions with Proteins and Other Molecules > Protein‐RNA Interactions: Functional Implications RNA Interactions with Proteins and Other Molecules > RNA‐Protein Complexes
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it