ArticlePloS one2020
Analysis of computational codon usage models and their association with translationally slow codons.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Position-dependent codon occurrence is associated with patterns of translational efficiency and ribosomal occupancy in the human transcriptome.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- The importance of nonsense errors: Estimating the rates and implications of ribosome drop-off during protein synthesis.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
- An exploratory in silico comparison of open-source codon harmonization tools.Microbial cell factories · 2023Article
- CHARMING: Harmonizing synonymous codon usage to replicate a desired codon usage pattern.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2022Article
- The effects of codon bias and optimality on mRNA and protein regulation.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2021Review
- Network analysis of synonymous codon usage.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Improved computational modeling of protein translation rates, including better prediction of where translational slowdowns along an mRNA sequence may occur, is critical for understanding co-translational folding. Because codons within a synonymous codon group are translated at different rates, many computational translation models rely on analyzing synonymous codons. Some models rely on genome-wide codon usage bias (CUB), believing that globally rare and common codons are the most informative of slow and fast translation, respectively. Others use the CUB observed only in highly expressed genes, which should be under selective pressure to be translated efficiently (and whose CUB may therefore be more indicative of translation rates). No prior work has analyzed these models for their ability to predict translational slowdowns. Here, we evaluate five models for their association with slowly translated positions as denoted by two independent ribosome footprint (RFP) count experiments from S. cerevisiae, because RFP data is often considered as a "ground truth" for translation rates across mRNA sequences. We show that all five considered models strongly associate with the RFP data and therefore have potential for estimating translational slowdowns. However, we also show that there is a weak correlation between RFP counts for the same genes originating from independent experiments, even when their experimental conditions are similar. This raises concerns about the efficacy of using current RFP experimental data for estimating translation rates and highlights a potential advantage of using computational models to understand translation rates instead.
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.