Lichen-forming fungus<i>Caloplaca flavoruscens</i>inhibits transcription factors and chromatin remodeling system in fungi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lichen-forming fungi and extracts derived from them have been used as alternative medicine sources for millennia and recently there has been a renewed interest in their known bioactive properties for anticancer agents, cosmetics and antibiotics. Although lichen-forming fungus-derived compounds are biologically and commercially valuable, few studies have been performed to determine their modes of action. This study used chemical-genetic and chemogenomic high-throughput analyses to gain insight into the modes of action of Caloplaca flavoruscens extracts. High-throughput screening of 575 lichen extracts was performed and 39 extracts were identified which inhibited yeast growth. A C. flavoruscens extract was selected as a promising antifungal and was subjected to genome-wide haploinsufficiency profiling and homozygous profiling assays. These screens revealed that yeast deletion strains lacking Rsc8, Pro1 and Toa2 were sensitive to three concentrations (IC25.5, IC25 and IC50, respectively) of C. flavoruscens extract. Gene-enrichment analysis of the data showed that C. flavoruscens extracts appear to perturb transcription and chromatin remodeling.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".