Cited by 22Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesRNA Research and SplicingRNA and protein synthesis mechanisms

Orthrus: toward evolutionary and functional RNA foundation models

Open access
Fradkin, Philip, Shi, Ruian “Ian”, Dalal, Taykhoom, Isaev, Keren, Frey, Brendan J., Lee, Leo J., Morris, Quaid, Wang, Bo·2026·Nature Methods

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

In the face of rapidly accumulating genomic data, our ability to predict key mature RNA properties that underlie transcript function and regulation remains limited. Pretrained genomic foundation models offer an avenue to adapt learned RNA representations to biological prediction tasks; however, existing models are trained using strategies borrowed from textual domains that do not leverage biological domain knowledge. Here we introduce Orthrus, a Mamba-based mature RNA foundation model pretrained using a self-supervised contrastive learning objective with biological augmentations. Orthrus is trained by maximizing embedding similarity between pairs of RNA transcripts that are formed from splice isoforms of ten model organisms and transcripts from orthologous genes in 400+ mammalian species. This training objective results in a latent representation that clusters RNA sequences with functional and evolutionary similarities. Orthrus' mature RNA isoform representations outperform genomic foundation models on mRNA property prediction tasks, requiring only a fraction of fine-tuning data. Finally, we show that Orthrus is capable of capturing divergent biological function of individual transcript isoforms.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41592-026-03064-3

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fradkin, P., Shi, R. “., Dalal, T., Isaev, K., Frey, B. J., Lee, L. J., Morris, Q., & Wang, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • New York Genome Center (US)
  • Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Lee, Leo J.
  • Morris, Quaid
  • Wang, Bo
Venue
Nature Methods
Published
2026-04-17
Volume
23
Issue
5
Pages
935-945
ISSN
  • 1548-7091 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-7105
OpenAlex
W7154722552
Cited by
22
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 9
FWCI
22.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Methods (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG013328)
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA008748)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA Research and Splicing
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
Keywords
contrastive learning, Mamba, splice variants, transcript regulation, self-supervised pre-training, bioaugmentation

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