The role of chromatin structure in regulating stress-induced transcription in <i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>This paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 27th International West Coast Chromatin and Chromosome Conference, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
All cells, whether free-living or part of a multicellular organism, must contend with a variety of environmental fluctuations that can be harmful or lethal to the cell. Cells exposed to different kinds of environmental stress rapidly alter gene transcription, resulting in the immediate downregulation of housekeeping genes, while crucial stress-responsive transcription is drastically increased. Common cis-acting elements within many stress-induced promoters, such as stress response elements and heat shock elements, allow for coordinated expression in response to many different stresses. However, specific promoter architectures, i.e., specific combinations of high- and low-affinity stress-responsive cis elements embedded in a particular chromatin environment, allow for unique expression patterns that are responsive to the individual type and degree of stress. The coordination of transcriptional stress responses and the role that chromatin structure plays in the regulation and kinetics of such responses is discussed. The interplay among global and gene-specific stress responses is illustrated using the constitutive and stress-induced transcriptional regulation of HSP82 as a model. This review also investigates evidence suggesting that stress-induced transcription is globally synchronized with the stress-induced repression of housekeeping gene via 2 distinct mechanisms of facilitating the binding of TATA-binding protein (TBP): TFIID and SAGA-mediated TBP binding.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".