Effect of Cell Surface Hydrophobicity, Charge, and Zymolectin Density on the Flocculation of <i>Saccharomyces Cerevisiae</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cell surface investigations for the yeast strains LCC1209 (Flo1 phenotype), LCC125 (NewFlo phenotype), and LCC1240, a nonflocculent variant of LCC1209, are reported. The strains were examined for their degree of flocculation, surface hydrophobicity, and surface charge. Cell surface zymolectin density was quantitated with a fluorescent avidinfluorescein isothiocyanate probe as well as a radio-labeled tritiated-mannose probe. Additionally, fluorescence microscopy was employed to examine the cell walls of the two flocculent yeast strains. The strains showed different hydrophobicity, surface charges, and apparent zymolectin densities. Cell surface hydrophobicity correlated with flocculation significantly (r = 0.684, P < 0.001). It was found that 82 and 75% of the variations in flocculation (n = 48) can be explained by the level of zymolectin density and zymolectin affinity for the Flo1 and NewFlo strains, respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".