Synchronization and Arrest of the Budding Yeast Cell Cycle Using Chemical and Genetic Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cell cycle of budding yeast can be arrested at specific positions by different genetic and chemical methods. These arrests enable study of cell cycle phase–specific phenotypes that would be missed during examination of asynchronous cultures. Some methods for arrest are reversible, with kinetics that enable release of cells back into a synchronous cycling state. Benefits of chemical and genetic methods include scalability across a large range of culture sizes from a few milliliters to many liters, ease of execution, the absence of specific equipment requirements, and synchronization and release of the entire culture. Of note, cell growth and division are decoupled during arrest and block-release experiments. Cells will continue transcription, translation, and accumulation of protein while arrested. If allowed to reenter the cell cycle, cells will do so as a population of mixed, larger-than-normal cells. Despite this important caveat, many aspects of budding yeast physiology are accessible using these simple chemical and genetic tools. Described here are methods for the block and release of cells in G1 phase and at the M/G1 transition using α-factor mating pheromone and the temperature-sensitive cdc15-2 allele, respectively, in addition to methods for arresting the cell cycle in early S phase and at G2/M by using hydroxyurea and nocodazole, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".