Closed ValWood closed 4 years ago
I think the karyogamy comes from S. cerevisiae anyway
and in pombe mating is normal
FYPO:0000760 | normal mating | exol-1::ura4 (disruption) | Microscopy | | Szankasi P et al. (1995)
hang on, is this about exo1 or exo2? The UniProt annotation says exo2 (which doesn't have a mating phenotype annotated, normal or abnormal).
Corrected. Note that I also simplified/modified function and added experimental evidence tags to the exonuclease activity. Thanks Sylvain
Ah sorry was exo2, but the role in karyogamy is unreported and exo2 is required for vegetative growth so likely to have pleiotropic phenotypes.
karyogamy is from an S. cerevisiae phenotype (probably used to be a GO annotation,? ) now only has nuclear fusion during mating: absent
This seems indirect
UniProtKB-KW:KW-0415 | S. pombe | P40383 | exo2 | karyogamy | | indirect phenotype
phenotype only?
Also this part of the function summary may be out of date?
Acts as a microtubule-associated protein which interacts with cytoplasmic microtubules through beta-tubulin and promotes in vitro assembly of tubulin into microtubules. Associates with microtubule functions such as chromosome transmission, nuclear migration, and SPB duplication. Has also a role in G1 to S transition and is involved in nuclear fusion during karyogamy (By similarity).
as in fission yeast I dopn't think there is any evidence that exo1 is a MAP