Many of the genes required for mating in <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i> are also required for mating in <i>Candida albicans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Candida albicans is the single, most frequently isolated human fungal pathogen. As with most fungal pathogens, the factors which contribute to pathogenesis in C. albicans are not known, despite more than a decade of molecular genetic analysis. Candida albicans was thought to be asexual until the discovery of the MTL loci homologous to the mating type (MAT) loci in Saccharomyces cerevisiae led to the demonstration that mating is possible. Using Candida albicans mutants in genes likely to be involved in mating, we analysed the process to determine its similarity to mating in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We examined disruptions of three of the genes in the MAPK pathway which is involved in filamentous growth in both S. cerevisiae and C. albicans and is known to control pheromone response in the former fungus. Disruptions in HST7 and CPH1 blocked mating in both MTLa and MTL(alpha) strains, whereas disruptions in STE20 had no effect. A disruption in KEX2, a gene involved in processing the S. cerevisiae pheromone Mf(alpha), prevented mating in MTL(alpha) but not MTLa cells, whereas a disruption in HST6, the orthologue of the STE6 gene which encodes an ABC transporter responsible for secretion of the Mfa pheromone, prevented mating in MTLa but not in MTL(alpha) cells. Disruption of two cell wall genes, ALS1 and INT1, had no effect on mating, even though ALS1 was identified by similarity to the S. cerevisiae sexual agglutinin, SAG1. The results reveal that these two diverged yeasts show a surprising similarity in their mating processes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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".