Promoter Deletion Analysis Using a Dual-Luciferase Reporter System
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
Promoter deletion analysis is a useful tool for identifying important regulatory regions involved in transcriptional control of gene expression. In this approach, a series of promoter deletion fragments are fused to a reporter gene, such as chloramphenicol acetyltransferase or luciferase gene in a vector, and then transfected into cells for induction. Screening the expression level of the reporter gene using either a qualitative or a quantitative assay, allows to identify the regulatory regions of interest (e.g., cis-acting elements or enhancer) in the promoter.Luciferase genes have been widely used as reporter genes for their sensitivity and efficiency. Firefly and Renilla luciferases are two commonly used reporters, which oxidize different substrates to generate quantifiable luminescence. Therefore, the enzymatic activities of firefly and Renilla luciferases can be sequentially measured in a single sample by controlling reaction conditions. Here, we describe a dual-luciferase reporter assay, where the promoter of interest is fused to a firefly luciferase reporter and is co-transfected into cells with an internal control vector (pRL-CMV) to express Renilla luciferase. Both the Firefly and Renilla luciferases are measured using a dual-luciferase reporter assay system which improves experimental accuracy.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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