MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965012924 · doi:10.1242/jcs.151423

Sharing the cell's bounty – organelle inheritance in yeast

2015· review· en· W1965012924 on OpenAlexafffund
Barbara Knoblach, Richard A. Rachubinski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMitochondrial Function and Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOrganelleBiologyCytokinesisCell divisionOrganelle biogenesisCell biologySaccharomyces cerevisiaeYeastBudding yeastGeneticsCellGeneBiogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eukaryotic cells replicate and partition their organelles between the mother cell and the daughter cell at cytokinesis. Polarized cells, notably the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, are well suited for the study of organelle inheritance, as they facilitate an experimental dissection of organelle transport and retention processes. Much progress has been made in defining the molecular players involved in organelle partitioning in yeast. Each organelle uses a distinct set of factors - motor, anchor and adaptor proteins - that ensures its inheritance by future generations of cells. We propose that all organelles, regardless of origin or copy number, are partitioned by the same fundamental mechanism involving division and segregation. Thus, the mother cell keeps, and the daughter cell receives, their fair and equitable share of organelles. This mechanism of partitioning moreover facilitates the segregation of organelle fragments that are not functionally equivalent. In this Commentary, we describe how this principle of organelle population control affects peroxisomes and other organelles, and outline its implications for yeast life span and rejuvenation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicMitochondrial Function and PathologyFrench-language works237,207