MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404055285 · doi:10.1101/2024.11.05.622059

Distribution of haploid chromosomes into separate nuclei in two pathogenic fungi

2024· preprint· en· W4404055285 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Xu, Lei Tian, Jinyi Tan, Josh Li, Nigel J. O’Neil, Martin Hirst, Phil Hieter, Yuelin Zhang, Xin Li

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Disease Resistance and Genetics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPloidyBiologyDistribution (mathematics)GeneticsMathematicsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The presence of nuclei defines eukaryotes, enabling compartmentalization of macromolecules and cellular regulation. Inside the nucleus, chromosome numbers vary greatly across organisms, both in terms of ploidy status and haploid chromosome number. For cells harboring multiple nuclei as in many fungal mycelia and animal muscle cells, each healthy nucleus is traditionally believed to carry at least one haploid set of chromosomes. Abnormal chromosome numbers in nuclei are often associated with aging, diseases such as cancer, developmental disorders or lethality. Here we report a surprising discovery that chromosomes in haploid cells of the fungal species Sclerotinia sclerotiorum and Botrytis cinerea are segregated into separate nuclei, with each nucleus containing only a fraction of the chromosomes. This is the first report of eukaryotic cells that partition chromosome subsets into distinct nuclei, bringing new questions and opening fresh avenues for chromosome biology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicPlant Disease Resistance and GeneticsFrench-language works237,207