MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000969918 · doi:10.1093/femsyr/foaa005

Transcriptional control of hyphal morphogenesis in<i>Candida albicans</i>

2020· review· en· W3000969918 on OpenAlexaff
Sonia Villa, Mohammad Hamideh, Anthony Weinstock, Mohammad N. Qasim, Tony R. Hazbun, Adnane Sellam, Aaron D. Hernday, Shankar Thangamani

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Yeast Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntifungal resistance and susceptibility
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
KeywordsBiologyCandida albicansMorphogenesisMulticellular organismHyphaVirulenceCorpus albicansCell biologyOrganismTranscription factorMicrobiologyFungal proteinYeastPhenotypeModel organismBudding yeastGeneticsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Candida albicans is a multimorphic commensal organism and opportunistic fungal pathogen in humans. A morphological switch between unicellular budding yeast and multicellular filamentous hyphal growth forms plays a vital role in the virulence of C. albicans, and this transition is regulated in response to a range of environmental cues that are encountered in distinct host niches. Many unique transcription factors contribute to the transcriptional regulatory network that integrates these distinct environmental cues and determines which phenotypic state will be expressed. These hyphal morphogenesis regulators have been extensively investigated, and represent an increasingly important focus of study, due to their central role in controlling a key C. albicans virulence attribute. This review provides a succinct summary of the transcriptional regulatory factors and environmental signals that control hyphal morphogenesis in C. albicans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations96
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEMS Yeast ResearchSame topicAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityFrench-language works237,207