MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997197922 · doi:10.1534/genetics.104.033134

Drosophila melanogaster Prat, a Purine de Novo Synthesis Gene, Has a Pleiotropic Maternal-Effect Phenotype

2004· article· en· W1997197922 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Malmanche, Denise V. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDrosophila melanogasterGeneticsPhenotypePurine metabolismBlastodermMutantGeneGermlineEmbryogenesisCell biologyEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Drosophila melanogaster, two genes, Prat and Prat2, encode the enzyme, amidophosphoribosyltransferase, that performs the first and limiting step in purine de novo synthesis. Only Prat mRNA is present in the female germline and 0- to 2-hr embryos prior to the onset of zygotic transcription. We studied the maternal-effect phenotype caused by Prat loss-of-function mutations, allowing us to examine the effects of decreased purine de novo synthesis during oogenesis and the early stages of embryonic development. In addition to the purine syndrome previously characterized, we found that Prat mutant adult females have a significantly shorter life span and are conditionally semisterile. The semisterility is associated with a pleiotropic phenotype, including egg chamber defects and later effects on embryonic and larval viability. Embryos show mitotic synchrony and/or nuclear content defects at the syncytial blastoderm stages and segmentation defects at later stages. The semisterility is partially rescued by providing Prat mutant females with an RNA-enriched diet as a source of purines. Our results suggest that purine de novo synthesis is a limiting factor during the processes of cellular or nuclear proliferation that take place during egg chamber and embryonic development.

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)0.000
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicRNA modifications and cancerFrench-language works237,207