Synthetic Genetic Arrays: Automation of Yeast Genetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome-sequencing efforts have led to great strides in the annotation of protein-coding genes and other genomic elements. The current challenge is to understand the functional role of each gene and how genes work together to modulate cellular processes. Genetic interactions define phenotypic relationships between genes and reveal the functional organization of a cell. Synthetic genetic array (SGA) methodology automates yeast genetics and enables large-scale and systematic mapping of genetic interaction networks in the budding yeast,Saccharomyces cerevisiae SGA facilitates construction of an output array of double mutants from an input array of single mutants through a series of replica pinning steps. Subsequent analysis of genetic interactions from SGA-derived mutants relies on accurate quantification of colony size, which serves as a proxy for fitness. Since its development, SGA has given rise to a variety of other experimental approaches for functional profiling of the yeast genome and has been applied in a multitude of other contexts, such as genome-wide screens for synthetic dosage lethality and integration with high-content screening for systematic assessment of morphology defects. SGA-like strategies can also be implemented similarly in a number of other cell types and organisms, includingSchizosaccharomyces pombe,Escherichia coli, Caenorhabditis elegans, and human cancer cell lines. The genetic networks emerging from these studies not only generate functional wiring diagrams but may also play a key role in our understanding of the complex relationship between genotype and phenotype.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".