Widespread occurrence of chromosomal aneuploidy following the routine production of<i>Candida albicans</i>mutants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has come to our attention that approximately 35% of >100 published microarray datasets, where transcript levels were compared between two different strains, exhibit some form of chromosome-specific bias. While some of these arose from the use of strains whose aneuploidies were not known at the time, in a worrisome number of cases the recombinant strains have acquired additional aneuploidies that were not initially present in the parental strain. The aneuploidies often affected a different chromosome than the one harboring the insertion site. The affected strains originated from either CAI-4, RM1000, BWP17 or SN95 and were produced through a variety of strategies. These observations suggest that aneuploidies frequently occur during the production of recombinant strains and have an effect on global transcript profiles outside of the afflicted chromosome(s), thus raising the possibility of unintended phenotypic consequences. Thus, we propose that all Candida albicans mutants and strains should be tested for aneuploidy before being used in further studies. To this end, we describe a new rapid testing method, based on a multiplex quantitative PCR assay, that produces eight bands of distinct sizes from either the left or right arms of each C. albicans chromosome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".