ArticlePloS one2017
Mistakes in translation: Reflections on mechanism.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structures of naked mole-rat, tuco-tuco, and guinea pig ribosomes-is rRNA fragmentation linked to translational fidelity?Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Structures of Naked Mole-Rat, Tuco-Tuco, and Guinea Pig Ribosomes-Is rRNA Fragmentation Linked to Translational Fidelity?bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Statistical Amplification of the Effects of Weak Magnetic Fields in Cellular Translation.Cells · 2023Article
- Broad range of missense error frequencies in cellular proteins.Nucleic acids research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mistakes in translation of messenger RNA into protein are clearly a detriment to the recombinant production of pure proteins for biophysical study or the biopharmaceutical market. However, they may also provide insight into mechanistic details of the translation process. Mistakes often involve the substitution of an amino acid having an abundant codon for one having a rare codon, differing by substitution of a G base by an A base, as in the case of substitution of a lysine (AAA) for arginine (AGA). In these cases one expects the substitution frequency to depend on the relative abundances of the respective tRNAs, and thus, one might expect frequencies to be similar for all sites having the same rare codon. Here we demonstrate that, for the ADP-ribosylation factor from yeast expressed in E. coli, lysine for arginine substitutions frequencies are not the same at the 9 sites containing a rare arginine codon; mis-incorporation frequencies instead vary from less than 1 to 16%. We suggest that the context in which the codons occur (clustering of rare sites) may be responsible for the variation. The method employed to determine the frequency of mis-incorporation involves a novel mass spectrometric analysis of the products from the parallel expression of wild type and codon-optimized genes in 15N and 14N enriched media, respectively. The high sensitivity and low material requirements of the method make this a promising technology for the collection of data relevant to other mis-incorporations. The additional data could be of value in refining models for the ribosomal translation elongation process.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.