Multi-scale perturbations of protein interactomes reveal their mechanisms of regulation, robustness and insights into genotype–phenotype maps
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular architectures and signaling machineries are organized through protein-protein interactions (PPIs). High-throughput methods to study PPIs in yeast have opened a new perspective on the organization of the cell by allowing the study of whole protein interactomes. Recent investigations have moved from the description of this organization to the analysis of its dynamics by experimenting how protein interaction networks (PINs) are rewired in response to perturbations. Here we review studies that have used the budding yeast as an experimental system to explore these altered networks. Given the large space of possible PPIs and the diversity of potential genetic and environmental perturbations, high-throughput methods are an essential requirement to survey PIN perturbations on a large scale. Network perturbations are typically conceptualized as the removal of entire proteins (nodes), the modification of single PPIs (edges) or changes in growth conditions. These studies have revealed mechanisms of PPI regulation, PIN architectural organization, robustness and sensitivity to perturbations. Despite these major advances, there are still inherent limits to current technologies that lead to a trade-off between the number of perturbations and the number of PPIs that can be considered simultaneously. Nevertheless, as we exemplify here, targeted approaches combined with the existing resources remain extremely powerful to explore the inner organization of cells and their responses to perturbations.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it