MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515058126 · doi:10.1101/pdb.prot088054

Identification of Chemical–Genetic Interactions via Parallel Analysis of Barcoded Yeast Strains

2016· article· en· W2515058126 on OpenAlexafffund
Sundari Suresh, Ulrich Schlecht, Weihong Xu, Molly Miranda, Ronald W. Davis, Corey Nislow, Guri Giaever, Robert P. St.Onge

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Protocols · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicFungal and yeast genetics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsYeastSaccharomyces cerevisiaeComputational biologyBiologyGeneticsGeneGene knockout

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Yeast Knockout Collection is a complete set of gene deletion strains for the budding yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae In each strain, one of approximately 6000 open-reading frames is replaced with a dominant selectable marker flanked by two DNA barcodes. These barcodes, which are unique to each gene, allow the growth of thousands of strains to be individually measured from a single pooled culture. The collection, and other resources that followed, has ushered in a new era in chemical biology, enabling unbiased and systematic identification of chemical-genetic interactions (CGIs) with remarkable ease. CGIs link bioactive compounds to biological processes, and hence can reveal the mechanism of action of growth-inhibitory compounds in vivo, including those of antifungal, antibiotic, and anticancer drugs. The chemogenomic profiling method described here measures the sensitivity induced in yeast heterozygous and homozygous deletion strains in the presence of a chemical inhibitor of growth (termed haploinsufficiency profiling and homozygous profiling, respectively, or HIPHOP). The protocol is both scalable and amenable to automation. After competitive growth of yeast knockout collection cultures, with and without chemical inhibitors, CGIs can be identified and quantified using either array- or sequencing-based approaches as described here.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor ProtocolsSame topicFungal and yeast genetics researchFrench-language works237,207