MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138226364 · doi:10.1083/jcb.200605019

Sumoylation of the budding yeast kinetochore protein Ndc10 is required for Ndc10 spindle localization and regulation of anaphase spindle elongation

2006· article· en· W2138226364 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Montpetit, Tony R. Hazbun, Stanley Fields, Philip Hieter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cell Biology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsSUMO proteinKinetochoreCell biologyBiologySpindle apparatusMitosisAnaphaseChromosome segregationSpindle pole bodySpindle checkpointAnaphase-promoting complexNocodazoleUbiquitinGeneticsCell divisionCell cycleChromosomeCellCytoskeleton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Posttranslational modification by the ubiquitin-like protein SUMO (small ubiquitin-like modifier) is emerging as an important regulator in many cellular processes, including genome integrity. In this study, we show that the kinetochore proteins Ndc10, Bir1, Ndc80, and Cep3, which mediate the attachment of chromosomes to spindle microtubules, are sumoylated substrates in budding yeast. Furthermore, we show that Ndc10, Bir1, and Cep3 but not Ndc80 are desumoylated upon exposure to nocodazole, highlighting the possibility of distinct roles for sumoylation in modulating kinetochore protein function and of a potential link between the sumoylation of kinetochore proteins and mitotic checkpoint function. We find that lysine to arginine mutations that eliminate the sumoylation of Ndc10 cause chromosome instability, mislocalization of Ndc10 from the mitotic spindle, abnormal anaphase spindles, and a loss of Bir1 sumoylation. These data suggest that sumoylation of Ndc10 and other kinetochore proteins play a critical role during the mitotic process.

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 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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations84
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cell BiologySame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207