Humanized yeast to model human biology, disease and evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For decades, budding yeast, a single-cellular eukaryote, has provided remarkable insights into human biology. Yeast and humans share several thousand genes despite morphological and cellular differences and over a billion years of separate evolution. These genes encode critical cellular processes, the failure of which in humans results in disease. Although recent developments in genome engineering of mammalian cells permit genetic assays in human cell lines, there is still a need to develop biological reagents to study human disease variants in a high-throughput manner. Many protein-coding human genes can successfully substitute for their yeast equivalents and sustain yeast growth, thus opening up doors for developing direct assays of human gene function in a tractable system referred to as 'humanized yeast'. Humanized yeast permits the discovery of new human biology by measuring human protein activity in a simplified organismal context. This Review summarizes recent developments showing how humanized yeast can directly assay human gene function and explore variant effects at scale. Thus, by extending the 'awesome power of yeast genetics' to study human biology, humanizing yeast reinforces the high relevance of evolutionarily distant model organisms to explore human gene evolution, function and disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".