MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035233903 · doi:10.4161/cc.10.2.14552

<i>S. pombe</i>replication protein Cdc18 (Cdc6) interacts with Swi6 (HP1) heterochromatin protein

2011· article· en· W2035233903 on OpenAlexaff
Pao-Chen Li, Louise Chrétien, Jocelyn Côté, Thomas J. Kelly, Susan L. Forsburg

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Cycle · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsBiologyHeterochromatinHeterochromatin protein 1CentromereOrigin recognition complexGeneticsDNA replicationOrigin of replicationReplication timingLicensing factorCell biologyEukaryotic DNA replicationGeneChromatinChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterochromatin in S. pombe is associated with gene silencing at telomeres, the mating locus and centromeres. The compact heterochromatin structure raises the question how it unpacks and reforms during DNA replication. We show that the essential DNA replication factor Cdc18 (CDC6) associates with heterochromatin protein 1 (Swi6) in vivo and in vitro. Biochemical mapping and mutational analysis of the association domains show that the N-terminus of Cdc18 interacts with the chromoshadow domain of Swi6. Mutations in Swi6 that disrupt this interaction disrupt silencing and delay replication in the centromere. A mutation cdc18-I43A that reduces Cdc18 association with Swi6 has no silencing defect at the centromere, but changes Swi6 distribution and accelerates the timing of centromere replication. We suggest that fine tuning of Swi6 association at replication origins is important for negative as well as positive control of replication initiation.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.749

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell CycleSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207