Synchronization and Arrest of the Budding Yeast Cell Cycle Using Chemical and Genetic Methods
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
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 G 1 phase and at the M/G 1 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 G 2 /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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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