Highly Combinatorial Genetic Interaction Analysis Reveals a Multi-Drug Transporter Influence Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many traits are complex, depending non-additively on variant combinations. Even in model systems, such as the yeast S. cerevisiae, carrying out the high-order variant-combination testing needed to dissect complex traits remains a daunting challenge. Here, we describe "X-gene" genetic analysis (XGA), a strategy for engineering and profiling highly combinatorial gene perturbations. We demonstrate XGA on yeast ABC transporters by engineering 5,353 strains, each deleted for a random subset of 16 transporters, and profiling each strain's resistance to 16 compounds. XGA yielded 85,648 genotype-to-resistance observations, revealing high-order genetic interactions for 13 of the 16 transporters studied. Neural networks yielded intuitive functional models and guided exploration of fluconazole resistance, which was influenced non-additively by five genes. Together, our results showed that highly combinatorial genetic perturbation can functionally dissect complex traits, supporting pursuit of analogous strategies in human cells and other model systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".