ArticleThe Journal of biological chemistry
Sisyphus observed: Unraveling the high ATP usage of an RNA chaperone.
Article in The Journal of biological chemistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DEAD-box proteins are nonprocessive RNA helicases that can function as RNA chaperones by coupling ATP binding and hydrolysis to structural reorganization of RNA. Here, Jarmoskaite et al. quantify the ATP utilization of an RNA chaperone during refolding of a misfolded ribozyme substrate. Strikingly, 100 ATP hydrolysis events are needed per successfully refolded ribozyme, suggesting that each round of unfolding requires ten ATP molecules, since 90% of substrate unfolding cycles only lead back to the kinetically favored misfolded state. This near-Sisyphean effort reveals a potentially conserved model for RNA reorganization by RNA chaperones.
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.