Riding The Ciliate Cell Cycle—A Thirty‐Five‐Year Prospective<sup>a</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of the ciliate cell cycle have moved from early examination of its biochemistry with heat-synchronized Tetrahymena through descriptive studies of Paramecium using small synchronous cell samples. These studies described what happens during the cell cycle and provided some initial insights into control, especially the idea that there was a point at which cells became committed to division. This early work was followed by an analytical phase in which the same small sample techniques, combined with gene mutations, were used to tease apart some major features of the regulation of cell growth kinetics, including regulation of macronuclear DNA content and regulation of cell size, the control of timing of initiation of macronuclear DNA synthesis, and the control of commitment to division in Paramecium. The availability of new molecular genetic approaches and new means of manipulating cells en masse made it possible to map out some of the basic features of the molecular biology of cell cycle regulation in ciliates. The challenge before us is to move beyond the 'me-too-ism' of validating the presence of basic molecular regulative machinery underlying the cell cycle in ciliates to a deeper analysis of the role of specific molecules in processes unique to ciliates or to analysis of the role of regulatory molecules in the control of cell process that can be uniquely well studied in ciliates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".