MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153890323 · doi:10.1091/mbc.e02-08-0517

Chl4p and Iml3p Are Two New Members of the Budding Yeast Outer Kinetochore

2003· article· en· W2153890323 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabelle Pot, Vivien Measday, Brian E Snydsman, Gerard Cagney, Stanley Fields, Trisha N. Davis, Eric G. Muller, Philip Hieter

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Biology of the Cell · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteKillam TrustsMichael Smith Health Research BCHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsKinetochoreCentromereBiologyCell biologyMitosisChromosome segregationSpindle apparatusGeneticsChromosomeCell divisionCellGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kinetochore proteins contribute to the fidelity of chromosome transmission by mediating the attachment of a specialized chromosomal region, the centromere, to the mitotic spindle during mitosis. In budding yeast, a subset of kinetochore proteins, referred to as the outer kinetochore, provides a link between centromere DNA-binding proteins of the inner kinetochore and microtubule-binding proteins. Using a combination of chromatin immunoprecipitation, in vivo localization, and protein coimmunoprecipitation, we have established that yeast Chl4p and Iml3p are outer kinetochore proteins that localize to the kinetochore in a Ctf19p-dependent manner. Chl4p interacts with the outer kinetochore proteins Ctf19p and Ctf3p, and Iml3p interacts with Chl4p and Ctf19p. In addition, Chl4p is required for the Ctf19p-Ctf3p and Ctf19p-Iml3p interactions, indicating that Chl4p is an important structural component of the outer kinetochore. These physical interaction dependencies provide insights into the molecular architecture and centromere DNA loading requirements of the outer kinetochore complex.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations65
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Biology of the CellSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207