MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110668915 · doi:10.1534/g3.115.016576

Leveraging DNA Damage Response Signaling to Identify Yeast Genes Controlling Genome Stability

2015· article· en· W2110668915 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason A. Hendry, Guihong Tan, Jiongwen Ou, Charles Boone, Grant W. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueG3 Genes Genomes Genetics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsGenome instabilityGenomeBiologyGeneticsGeneSaccharomyces cerevisiaeCarcinogenesisHuman genomeComputational biologyGenetic screenDNA damagePhenotypeDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oncogenesis frequently is accompanied by rampant genome instability, which fuels genetic heterogeneity and resistance to targeted cancer therapy. We have developed an approach that allows precise, quantitative measurement of genome instability in high-throughput format in the Saccharomyces cerevisiae model system. Our approach takes advantage of the strongly DNA damage-inducible gene RNR3, in conjunction with the reporter synthetic genetic array methodology, to infer mutants exhibiting genome instability by assaying for increased Rnr3 abundance. We screen for genome instability across a set of ~1000 essential and ~4200 nonessential mutant yeast alleles in untreated conditions and in the presence of the DNA-damaging agent methylmethane sulfonate. Our results provide broad insights into the cellular processes and pathways required for genome maintenance. Through comparison with existing genome instability screens, we isolated 130 genes that had not previously been linked to genome maintenance, 51% of which have human homologs. Several of these homologs are associated with a genome instability phenotype in human cells or are causally mutated in cancer. A comprehensive understanding of the processes required to prevent genome instability will facilitate a better understanding of its sources in oncogenesis.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueG3 Genes Genomes GeneticsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207