MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7033676160

RNA binding protein SRRM 2/3/4 is required for e2f1b splicing in Drosophila

2025· dissertation· en· W7033676160 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2025
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCaribbean and African Literature and Culture
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRNA-binding proteinRNA splicingPoly(A)-binding proteinBinding proteinPlasma protein bindingRNASplicing factorDrosophila (subgenus)Drosophila melanogasterExonic splicing enhancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E2f1 is a transcription factor necessary for the regulation of cell cycle related checkpoints and activities.Drosophila melanogaster is known to have two activator e2f1 isoforms, produced by alternative splicing: e2f1a and e2f1b.E2f1b contains a 16aa microexon (termed 3b) in the MB domain that is spliced via unknown alternative splicing mechanisms.In this thesis, I report my studies on neural RNA binding protein SRRM 2/3/4 as a regulator and promoter of e2f1b specific splicing.Studies were carried out in larval tissues using molecular methods such as qPCR, immunofluorescence, in situ hybridization, RNA interference, and confocal microscopy to better understand the scope of SRRM 2/3/4's regulatory influence on alternative splicing of e2f1.My data suggests that SRRM 2/3/4, although not majorly involved in the salivary gland as opposed to neural tissues, promotes inclusion of micro exon 3b in the salivary gland.Additionally, srrm 2/3/4 RNAi salivary glands are marked by disrupted cell cycles in srrm 2/3/4 RNAi salivary glands, diminished PCNA-GFP activity, which recapitulates many aspects of the e2f1b-deficient salivary glands.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicCaribbean and African Literature and Culture→French-language works237,207→