Comparative functional genomic screens of three yeast deletion collections reveal unexpected effects of genotype in response to diverse stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Yeast Knockout (YKO) collection has provided a wealth of functional annotations from genome-wide screens. An unintended consequence is that 76% of gene annotations derive from one genotype. The nutritional auxotrophies in the YKO, in particular, have phenotypic consequences. To address this issue, ‘prototrophic’ versions of the YKO collection have been constructed, either by introducing a plasmid carrying wild-type copies of the auxotrophic markers (Plasmid-Borne, PB prot ) or by backcrossing (Backcrossed, BC prot ) to a wild-type strain. To systematically assess the impact of the auxotrophies, genome-wide fitness profiles of prototrophic and auxotrophic collections were compared across diverse drug and environmental conditions in 250 experiments. Our quantitative profiles uncovered broad impacts of genotype on phenotype for three deletion collections, and revealed genotypic and strain-construction-specific phenotypes. The PB prot collection exhibited fitness defects associated with plasmid maintenance, while BC prot fitness profiles were compromised due to strain loss from nutrient selection steps during strain construction. The repaired prototrophic versions of the YKO collection did not restore wild-type behaviour nor did they clarify gaps in gene annotation resulting from the auxotrophic background. To remove marker bias and expand the experimental scope of deletion libraries, construction of a bona fide prototrophic collection from a wild-type strain will be required.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".