Cited by 2,460MicroRNA in disease regulationRNA and protein synthesis mechanismsRNA Research and Splicing

The role of site accessibility in microRNA target recognition

Kertesz, Michael, Iovino, Nicola, Unnerstall, Ulrich, Gaul, Ulrike, Segal, Eran·2007·Nature Genetics

Abstract

MicroRNAs are key regulators of gene expression, but the precise mechanisms underlying their interaction with their mRNA targets are still poorly understood. Here, we systematically investigate the role of target-site accessibility, as determined by base-pairing interactions within the mRNA, in microRNA target recognition. We experimentally show that mutations diminishing target accessibility substantially reduce microRNA-mediated translational repression, with effects comparable to those of mutations that disrupt sequence complementarity. We devise a parameter-free model for microRNA-target interaction that computes the difference between the free energy gained from the formation of the microRNA-target duplex and the energetic cost of unpairing the target to make it accessible to the microRNA. This model explains the variability in our experiments, predicts validated targets more accurately than existing algorithms, and shows that genomes accommodate site accessibility by preferentially positioning targets in highly accessible regions. Our study thus demonstrates that target accessibility is a critical factor in microRNA function.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ng2135

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Current target prediction algorithms often identify many false positive target genes and there is no strong overlap in predicted target gene list among prediction algorithms.

    “current target prediction algorithms often identify many false positive target genes and there is no strong overlap in the predicted target gene list among prediction algorithms [138-141].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kertesz, M., Iovino, N., Unnerstall, U., Gaul, U., & Segal, E.
Affiliations
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
  • Rockefeller University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Gaul, Ulrike
  • Segal, Eran
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2007-09-23
Volume
39
Issue
10
Pages
1278-1284
ISSN
  • 1061-4036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-1718
OpenAlex
W2149785901
Cited by
2,460
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 46 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 89 · 2022: 118 · 2021: 133 · 2020: 143 · 2019: 141 · 2018: 159 · 2017: 155 · 2016: 171 · 2015: 181 · 2014: 194 · 2013: 189 · 2012: 185
FWCI
33.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › MicroRNA in disease regulation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
Keywords
microRNA, protein synthesis inhibition, base pairing, free energy model, miRNA target prediction, mRNA secondary structure, sequence complementarity
MeSH terms
Animals, Binding Sites, Drosophila, Humans, Models, Biological, Nucleic Acid Conformation, RNA, Messenger, Thermodynamics, Caenorhabditis elegans, MicroRNAs, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review