The yeast 2-micron plasmid Rep2 protein has Rep1-independent partitioning function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Equal partitioning of the multi-copy 2-micron plasmid of the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae requires association of the plasmid Rep1 and Rep2 proteins with the plasmid STB partitioning locus. Determining how the Rep proteins contribute has been complicated by interactions between the components. Here, each Rep protein was expressed fused to the DNA-binding domain of the bacterial repressor protein LexA in yeast harboring a replication-competent plasmid that had LexA-binding sites but lacked STB. Plasmid transmission to daughter cells was increased only by Rep2 fusion expression. Neither Rep1 nor a functional RSC2 complex (a chromatin remodeler required for 2-micron plasmid partitioning) were needed for the improvement. Deletion analysis showed the carboxy-terminal 65 residues of Rep2 were required and sufficient for this Rep1-independent inheritance. Mutation of a conserved basic motif in this domain impaired Rep1-independent and Rep protein/STB-dependent plasmid partitioning. Our findings suggest Rep2, which requires Rep1 and the RSC2 complex for functional association with STB, directly participates in 2-micron plasmid partitioning by linking the plasmid to a host component that is efficiently partitioned during cell division. Further investigation is needed to reveal the host factor targeted by Rep2 that contributes to the survival of these plasmids in their budding yeast hosts.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".