MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“Sleeping Beauty”: Quiescence in<i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>

2004· review· en· W2097423540 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph V. Gray, Gregory A. Petsko, Gerald C. Johnston, Dagmar Ringe, Richard A. Singer, Margaret Werner‐Washburne

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrobiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsBiologyYeastSaccharomyces cerevisiaeCell biologyCell cyclePopulationCell physiologyCellProtein kinase AKinaseGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cells of organisms as diverse as bacteria and humans can enter stable, nonproliferating quiescent states. Quiescent cells of eukaryotic and prokaryotic microorganisms can survive for long periods without nutrients. This alternative state of cells is still poorly understood, yet much benefit is to be gained by understanding it both scientifically and with reference to human health. Here, we review our knowledge of one "model" quiescent cell population, in cultures of yeast grown to stationary phase in rich media. We outline the importance of understanding quiescence, summarize the properties of quiescent yeast cells, and clarify some definitions of the state. We propose that the processes by which a cell enters into, maintains viability in, and exits from quiescence are best viewed as an environmentally triggered cycle: the cell quiescence cycle. We synthesize what is known about the mechanisms by which yeast cells enter into quiescence, including the possible roles of the protein kinase A, TOR, protein kinase C, and Snf1p pathways. We also discuss selected mechanisms by which quiescent cells maintain viability, including metabolism, protein modification, and redox homeostasis. Finally, we outline what is known about the process by which cells exit from quiescence when nutrients again become available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations580
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrobiology and Molecular Biology ReviewsSame topicFungal and yeast genetics researchFrench-language works237,207