MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384664478 · doi:10.1021/acs.jproteome.3c00266

A Rapid and Efficient Method for the Extraction of Histone Proteins

2023· article· en· W4384664478 on OpenAlexafffund
Charles Homsi, Roshan Elizabeth Rajan, Robin Minati, Edlie St-Hilaire, Éric Bonneil, Simon F. Dufresne, Hugo Würtele, Alain Verreault, Pierre Thibault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Proteome Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de MontréalInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéGenome Canada
KeywordsHistoneYeastExtraction (chemistry)ChromatographyClipping (morphology)BiochemistryComputational biologyBiologyChemistryDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current protocols used to extract and purify histones are notoriously tedious, especially when using yeast cells. Here, we describe the use of a simple filter-aided sample preparation approach enabling histone extraction from yeast and mammalian cells using acidified ethanol, which not only improves extraction but also inactivates histone-modifying enzymes. We show that our improved method prevents N-terminal clipping of H3, an artifact frequently observed in yeast cells using standard histone extraction protocols. Our method is scalable and provides efficient recovery of histones when extracts are prepared from as few as two million yeast cells. We further demonstrate the application of this approach for the analysis of histone modifications in fungal clinical isolates available in a limited quantity. Compared with standard protocols, our method enables the study of histones and their modifications in a faster, simpler, and more robust manner.

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)0.004
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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.380 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Proteome ResearchSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207