MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991056002 · doi:10.1186/1471-2199-10-32

Requirements for E1A dependent transcription in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

2009· article· en· W1991056002 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed F. Yousef, Christopher J. Brandl, Joe S. Mymryk

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Molecular Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologySaccharomyces cerevisiaeTranscription (linguistics)Transcription factorPromoterCell biologyGeneral transcription factorGeneticsActivator (genetics)Transcription coregulatorDNA-binding domainTranscriptional regulationGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The human adenovirus type 5 early region 1A (E1A) gene encodes proteins that are potent regulators of transcription. E1A does not bind DNA directly, but is recruited to target promoters by the interaction with sequence specific DNA binding proteins. In mammalian systems, E1A has been shown to contain two regions that can independently induce transcription when fused to a heterologous DNA binding domain. When expressed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, each of these regions of E1A also acts as a strong transcriptional activator. This allows yeast to be used as a model system to study mechanisms by which E1A stimulates transcription. RESULTS: Using 81 mutant yeast strains, we have evaluated the effect of deleting components of the ADA, COMPASS, CSR, INO80, ISW1, NuA3, NuA4, Mediator, PAF, RSC, SAGA, SAS, SLIK, SWI/SNF and SWR1 transcriptional regulatory complexes on E1A dependent transcription. In addition, we examined the role of histone H2B ubiquitylation by Rad6/Bre1 on transcriptional activation. CONCLUSION: Our analysis indicates that the two activation domains of E1A function via distinct mechanisms, identify new factors regulating E1A dependent transcription and suggest that yeast can serve as a valid model system for at least some aspects of E1A function.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Molecular BiologySame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207