Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molecular chaperones are critical to maintaining cellular protein homeostasis. There are several families of chaperones in the cell with some being specific for certain substrates, while others act on many protein targets. As a result, chaperones are expected to be involved in many cellular pathways with only a few being well elucidated. To obtain a comprehensive view of chaperone function in the cell, we developed an integrative approach based on systematic physical and genetic interaction mapping to decipher interactions involving all main chaperones (67) and cochaperones (15) of Saccharomyces cerevisiae . The analysis revealed novel chaperone substrates and novel chaperone activities. As part of this analysis, we unexpectedly found that many interactors of the Hsp90 chaperone system are proteins that form foci under stress conditions. Such foci forming tendency was then demonstrated for the highly conserved AAA+ ATPases Rvb1 and Rvb2 that are part of the R2TP complex that interacts with Hsp90. In response to nutrient deprivation, a fraction of Rvb1 and Rvb2 colocalize to perinuclear foci that dissolve upon nutrient addition. We propose that foci formation might be a feature of many chaperone substrates. Support or Funding Information Canadian Institutes of Health Research
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
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".