MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392169529 · doi:10.1093/genetics/iyae016

A fluorescent assay for cryptic transcription in <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i> reveals novel insights into factors that stabilize chromatin structure on newly replicated DNA

2024· article· en· W4392169529 on OpenAlexafffund
Ellia Gao, Joshua A.R. Brown, Stephanie Jung, LeAnn J. Howe

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyChromatinSaccharomyces cerevisiaeGeneticsDNATranscription (linguistics)Transcription factorComputational biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The disruption of chromatin structure can result in transcription initiation from cryptic promoters within gene bodies. While the passage of RNA polymerase II is a well-characterized chromatin-disrupting force, numerous factors, including histone chaperones, normally stabilize chromatin on transcribed genes, thereby repressing cryptic transcription. DNA replication, which employs a partially overlapping set of histone chaperones, is also inherently disruptive to chromatin, but a role for DNA replication in cryptic transcription has never been examined. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that, in the absence of chromatin-stabilizing factors, DNA replication can promote cryptic transcription in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Using a novel fluorescent reporter assay, we show that multiple factors, including Asf1, CAF-1, Rtt106, Spt6, and FACT, block transcription from a cryptic promoter, but are entirely or partially dispensable in G1-arrested cells, suggesting a requirement for DNA replication in chromatin disruption. Collectively, these results demonstrate that transcription fidelity is dependent on numerous factors that function to assemble chromatin on nascent DNA.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeneticsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207