Short verdict: Keep. This is a core decay node; include that decay is coupled to translation, localization, and RNA modifications.
What the current graph claims
Node definition: mRNA stability and decay through deadenylation, decapping, XRN1/exosome degradation, and regulated half-life control.
Incoming edges:
STAMP -> TIMER: YTHDF2→CCR4-NOT / (decay)
READERS -> TIMER: HuR (stabilize) / TTP (decay)
DARTS -> TIMER: deadenylation / + decay
CENSOR -> TIMER: triggers / degradation
Outgoing edges:
TIMER -> VAULT: stored or / degraded (bidirectional)
Literature-grounded assessment
What is strongly supported: CCR4-NOT/PAN2-PAN3 deadenylation, DCP1/2 decapping, XRN1, and exosome pathways are central to mRNA turnover; decay strongly shapes expression output.
What is context-dependent: Decay routes differ by transcript class, codon optimality, miRNA/RBP/m6A regulation, stress state, and subcellular location.
What is weak, controversial, or assay-biased: Half-life measurements vary by metabolic labeling/drug shutoff method; transcription inhibition can perturb decay.
What may be duplicate biology under another name: Overlaps with CENSOR, DARTS, STAMP, VAULT.
Missing or excessive graph structure
Missing edges: Add SHIELD -> TIMER protective relation and TEMPO/codon optimality -> TIMER in detailed map.
Excess edges: TIMER -> VAULT “stored or degraded” is okay but P-body localization is not proof of decay.
Candidate splits: No split.
Candidate merges: No merge.
Candidate renames: mRNA-DECAY would be clearer.
Recommendation
Concrete graph change, if any: Keep; caveat measurement artifacts and P-body interpretation.
Concrete technical-notes/blog wording change, if any: Mirror the graph recommendation in the glossary and relation catalogue, and explicitly mark the confidence/caveat where the claim is context-dependent or assay-sensitive.