ArticlePloS one2023
RNA structural probing of guanine and uracil nucleotides in yeast.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- UFold-X: an enhanced Dual & Dynamic U-Mamba model for long-range RNA secondary structure prediction.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Phenylglyoxal-induced Ana o 3 Modification Reduces Antibody Binding with Minimal Alteration in Protein Structure.Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2025Article
- Utilizing drip metabolites and predictive modeling for non-destructive freshness assessment in pork loin.NPJ science of food · 2025Article
- A new reagent for in vivo structure probing of RNA G and U residues that improves RNA structure prediction alone and combined with DMS.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
RNA structure can be essential for its cellular function. Therefore, methods to investigate the structure of RNA in vivo are of great importance for understanding the role of cellular RNAs. RNA structure probing is an indirect method to asess the three-dimensional structure of RNA by analyzing the reactivity of different nucleotides to chemical modifications. Dimethyl sulfate (DMS) is a well-established compound that reports on base pairing context of adenine (A) and cytidine (C) in-vitro and in-vivo, but is not reactive to guanine (G) or uracil (U). Recently, new compounds were used to modify Gs and Us in plant, bacteria, and human cells. To complement the scope of RNA structural probing by chemical modifications in the model organism yeast, we analyze the effectiveness of guanine modification by the glyoxal family in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Candida albicans. We show that within glyoxal family of compounds, phenylglyoxal (PGO) is the best guanine probe for structural probing in S. cerevisiae and C. albicans. Further, we show that PGO treatment does not affect the processing of different RNA species in the cell and is not toxic for the cells under the conditions we have established for RNA structural probing. We also explore the effectiveness of uracil modification by Cyclohexyl-3-(2-Morpholinoethyl) Carbodiimide metho-p-Toluenesulfonate (CMCT) in vivo and demonstrate that uracils can be modified by CMCT in S. cerevisiae in vivo. Our results provide the conditions for in vivo probing the reactivity of guanine and uracil nucleotides in RNA structures in yeast and offer a valuable tool for studying RNA structure and function in two widely used yeast model systems.
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.