Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 234

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

RNA folding and combinatory landscapes

Fontana, Walter, Stadler, Peter F., Bornberg-Bauer, Erich G., Griesmacher, Thomas, Hofacker, Ivo L., Tacker, Manfred, Tarazona, Pedro, Weinberger, Edward D., Schuster, Peter·1993·Physical Review E

Abstract

In this paper we view the folding of polynucleotide (RNA) sequences as a map that assigns to each sequence a minimum-free-energy pattern of base pairings, known as secondary structure. Considering only the free energy leads to an energy landscape over the sequence space. Taking into account structure generates a less visualizable nonscalar ``landscape,'' where a sequence space is mapped into a space of discrete ``shapes.'' We investigate the statistical features of both types of landscapes by computing autocorrelation functions, as well as distributions of energy and structure distances, as a function of distance in sequence space. RNA folding is characterized by very short structure correlation lengths compared to the diameter of the sequence space. The correlation lengths depend strongly on the size and the pairing rules of the underlying nucleotide alphabet. Our data suggest that almost every minimum-free-energy structure is found within a small neighborhood of any random sequence. The interest in such landscapes results from the fact that they govern natural and artificial processes of optimization by mutation and selection. Simple statistical model landscapes, like Kauffman and Levin's n-k model [J. Theor. Biol. 128, 11 (1987)], are often used as a proxy for understanding realistic landscapes, like those induced by RNA folding. We make a detailed comparison between the energy landscapes derived from RNA folding and those obtained from the n-k model. We derive autocorrelation functions for several variants of the n-k model, and briefly summarize work on its fine structure. The comparison leads to an estimate for k=7--8, independent of n, where n is the chain length. While the scaling behaviors agree, the fine structure is considerably different in the two cases. The reason is seen to be the extremely high frequency of neutral neighbors, that is, neighbors with identical energy (or structure), in the RNA case.

Overview

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 · 10.1103/physreve.47.2083

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cited by

See all 234

Metadata

Authors
Fontana, W., Stadler, P. F., Bornberg-Bauer, E. G., Griesmacher, T., Hofacker, I. L., Tacker, M., Tarazona, P., Weinberger, E. D., & Schuster, P.
Venue
Physical Review E
Published
1993-03-01
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
2083-2099
ISSN
  • 1063-651X (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-3787
OpenAlex
W1970957621
Cited by
234
References
0
FWCI
4.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: RNA folding and combinatory landscapes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physreve.47.2083
The paper
Fontana, W., Stadler, P. F., Bornberg-Bauer, E. G., Griesmacher, T., Hofacker, I. L., Tacker, M., Tarazona, P., Weinberger, E. D., & Schuster, P. (1993). RNA folding and combinatory landscapes. Physical Review E. https://doi.org/10.1103/physreve.47.2083

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.