Features of the Chaperone Cellular Network Revealed through Systematic Interaction Mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comprehensive view of molecular chaperone function in the cell was obtained through a systematic global integrative network approach based on physical (protein-protein) and genetic (gene-gene or epistatic) interaction mapping. This allowed us to decipher interactions involving all core chaperones (67) and cochaperones (15) of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Our analysis revealed the presence of a large chaperone functional supercomplex, which we named the naturally joined (NAJ) chaperone complex, encompassing Hsp40, Hsp70, Hsp90, AAA+, CCT, and small Hsps. We further found that many chaperones interact with proteins that form foci or condensates under stress conditions. Using an in vitro reconstitution approach, we demonstrate condensate formation for the highly conserved AAA+ ATPases Rvb1 and Rvb2, which are part of the R2TP complex that interacts with Hsp90. This expanded view of the chaperone network in the cell clearly demonstrates the distinction between chaperones having broad versus narrow substrate specificities in protein homeostasis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".