MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154031958 · doi:10.1534/genetics.109.100438

Analysis of the Sequence and Phenotype of Drosophila <i>Sex combs reduced</i> Alleles Reveals Potential Functions of Conserved Protein Motifs of the Sex combs reduced Protein

2009· article· en· W2154031958 on OpenAlexaff
Lovesha Sivanantharajah, Anthony Percival‐Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsAlleleMissense mutationPhenotypeGeneNull alleleConserved sequencePeptide sequence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Drosophila Hox gene, Sex combs reduced (Scr), is required for patterning the larval and adult, labial and prothoracic segments. Fifteen Scr alleles were sequenced and the phenotypes analyzed in detail. Six null alleles were nonsense mutations (Scr(2), Scr(4), Scr(11), Scr(13), Scr(13A), and Scr(16)) and one was an intragenic deletion (Scr(17)). Five hypomorphic alleles were missense mutations (Scr(1), Scr(3), Scr(5), Scr(6), and Scr(8)) and one was a small protein deletion (Scr(15)). Protein sequence changes were found in four of the five highly conserved domains of SCR: the DYTQL motif (Scr(15)), YPWM motif (Scr(3)), Homeodomain (Scr(1)), and C-terminal domain (CTD) (Scr(6)), indicating importance for SCR function. Analysis of the pleiotropy of viable Scr alleles for the formation of pseudotracheae suggests that the DYTQL motif and the CTD mediate a genetic interaction with proboscipedia. One allele Scr(14), a missense allele in the conserved octapeptide, was an antimorphic allele that exhibited three interesting genetic properties. First, Scr(14)/Df had the same phenotype as Scr(+)/Df. Second, the ability of the Scr(14) allele to interact intragenetically with Scr alleles mapped to the first 82 amino acids of SCR, which contains the octapeptide motif. Third, Scr(6), which has two missense changes in the CTD, did not interact genetically with Scr(14).

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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations24
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchFrench-language works237,207