MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“Reverse torpedoes“ model for the termination and processing of U3 snoRNA

2007· article· en· W75976625 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ross N. Nazar, Sadegh Nabavi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPolyadenylationExonucleaseSmall nucleolar RNATranscription (linguistics)BiologyCleavage (geology)RNACell biologyAntiterminationTermination factorDNAMolecular biologyGeneticsGeneNon-coding RNAPolymeraseRNA-dependent RNA polymerase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the termination of transcription and 3′ RNA processing of the eukaryotic mRNA has been linked to a polyadenylation signal and a transcript cleavage process, much less is known about the termination or processing of non polyadenylated pol II transcripts. An efficiently expressed plasmid‐based expression system was used to study the termination and processing of S. pombe U3 snoRNA transcripts in vivo . The termination assay was linked to cell transformation and restriction fragment length polymorphism was used to determine levels of plasmid‐derived U3 snoRNA. Mutation analyses in vivo indicate that the maturation of the 3′ end is not directly dependent on an external cis‐acting sequence or structure; rather, it is dependent on a transcript cleavage which can occur hundreds or even thousands of nucleotides downstream of the mature U3 snoRNA sequence. Similarly, termination is dependent on transcript cleavage which is localized in a hairpin structure that normally follows the 3′ end of the U3 snoRNA but, which also can be moved hundreds or thousands of nucleotides downstream. Both processes, however, can be induced simultaneously and equally efficiently with a single unrelated Pac 1 endonuclease‐labile structure. The results support a “reverse torpedoes” model in which a single cleavage allows exonuclease access to the transcript leading to transcription termination in one direction and RNA maturation in the other direction. Supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicRNA modifications and cancerFrench-language works237,207