Data from: Multiple pairwise analysis of non-homologous centromere coupling reveals preferential chromosome size-dependent interactions and a role for bouquet formation in establishing the interaction pattern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During meiosis, chromosomes undergo a homology search in order to locate their homolog to form stable pairs and exchange genetic material. Early in prophase, chromosomes associate in mostly non-homologous pairs, tethered only at their centromeres. This phenomenon, conserved through higher eukaryotes, is termed centromere coupling in budding yeast. Both initiation of recombination and the presence of homologs are dispensable for centromere coupling (occurring in spo11 mutants and haploids induced to undergo meiosis) but the presence of the synaptonemal complex (SC) protein Zip1 is required. The nature and mechanism of coupling have yet to be elucidated. Here we present the first pairwise analysis of centromere coupling in an effort to uncover underlying rules that may exist within these non-homologous interactions. We designed a novel chromosome conformation capture (3C)-based assay to detect all possible interactions between non-homologous yeast centromeres during early meiosis. Using this variant of 3C-qPCR, we found a size-dependent interaction pattern, in which chromosomes assort preferentially with chromosomes of similar sizes, in haploid and diploid spo11 cells, but not in a coupling-defective mutant (spo11 zip1 haploid and diploid yeast). This pattern is also observed in wild-type diploids early in meiosis but disappears as meiosis progresses and homologous chromosomes pair. We found no evidence to support the notion that ancestral centromere homology plays a role in pattern establishment in S. cerevisiae post-genome duplication. Moreover, we found a role for the meiotic bouquet in establishing the size dependence of centromere coupling, as abolishing bouquet (using the bouquet-defective spo11 ndj1 mutant) reduces it. Coupling in spo11 ndj1 rather follows telomere clustering preferences. We propose that a chromosome size preference for centromere coupling helps establish efficient homolog recognition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".