MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800712240 · doi:10.1242/jcs.216598

ARF6 protects sister chromatid cohesion to ensure the formation of stable kinetochore-microtubule attachments

2018· article· en· W2800712240 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohamed Bourmoum, Ricardo Charles, Audrey Claing

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEstablishment of sister chromatid cohesionSister chromatidsCohesinKinetochoreBiologyCell biologySeparaseMetaphaseAnaphaseChromatidChromosome segregationCentromereSpindle checkpointMitosisMicrotubuleSpindle apparatusGeneticsCell divisionChromosomeCell cycleCell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sister chromatid cohesion, facilitated by the cohesin protein complex, is crucial for the establishment of stable bipolar attachments of chromosomes to the spindle microtubules and their faithful segregation. Here, we demonstrate that the GTPase ARF6 prevents the premature loss of sister chromatid cohesion. During mitosis, ARF6-depleted cells normally completed chromosome congression. However, at the metaphase plate, chromosomes failed to establish stable kinetochore-microtubule attachments because of the impaired cohesion at centromeres. As a result, the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) was active and cyclin B ubiquitylation and degradation were blocked. Chromosomes and/or chromatids in these cells scattered gradually from the metaphase plate to the two poles of the cell or remained blocked at the metaphase plate for hours. Our study demonstrates that the small GTP-binding protein ARF6 is essential for maintaining centromeric cohesion between sister chromatids, which is necessary for the establishment of stable k-fibres, SAC satisfaction and the onset of anaphase.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicMicrotubule and mitosis dynamicsFrench-language works237,207