← Browse entries

RVS161

S. cerevisiae

amphiphysin-like protein RVS161

What the model saw

Gene: RVS161
Organism: Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Known functions: amphiphysin-like protein RVS161. cytoskeletal protein binding. lipid binding. protein binding.
View unredacted entry
amphiphysin-like protein RVS161. cytoskeletal protein binding. lipid binding. protein binding.

Solver output

Predicted influence
Pro-longevity
Confidence
62%
Mechanism
Other
Reasoning

RVS161 encodes an amphiphysin-like protein (BAR domain protein) in yeast that forms a heterodimer with RVS167 and is involved in membrane curvature sensing, endocytosis, and actin cytoskeleton organization at the plasma membrane. Its lipid-binding and cytoskeletal protein-binding activities are essential for proper endocytic vesicle formation and membrane trafficking. Loss of RVS161 in yeast is associated with reduced chronological and replicative lifespan, as proper endocytosis and membrane homeostasis are critical for nutrient sensing and cellular fitness during aging. The amphiphysin/BAR domain complex participates in sphingolipid-rich membrane domain organization, which connects to nutrient sensing pathways (TORC1/TORC2) that are central regulators of yeast longevity. Maintenance of membrane integrity and endocytic trafficking supports proteostasis and appropriate intercellular signaling, both of which are pro-longevity functions.

Key pathways
endocytosis and membrane traffickingactin cytoskeleton organizationlipid/membrane homeostasis
Longevity influence
Anti-longevity
Lifespan effect
Increase and Decrease

GenAge curators classify each gene's normal function as promoting (Pro-Longevity) or opposing (Anti-Longevity) longevity, based on synthesis across studies. Loss-of-function effects can vary from this depending on the manipulation.

Advisor judgment

Answer
Incorrect
Mechanism
Incorrect
Reasoning quality
2/5
Failure mode
Confident wrong
Notes

The model predicted pro_longevity but the ground truth is anti_longevity. The model's reasoning is internally consistent but factually incorrect - it claims that loss of RVS161 reduces lifespan, which would make it pro_longevity (supporting longevity when present). However, the GenAge database classifies RVS161 as anti_longevity, meaning deletion of RVS161 actually extends lifespan. The model's mechanistic reasoning about endocytosis, membrane trafficking, and BAR domain function is plausible but leads to the wrong conclusion. The model appears to have assumed that a protein involved in important cellular functions must be pro-longevity, without considering that RVS161 deletion could extend lifespan (anti_longevity classification). The confidence of 0.62 is moderate but still wrong.

Raw API responses

solver

{
  "reasoning": "RVS161 encodes an amphiphysin-like protein (BAR domain protein) in yeast that forms a heterodimer with RVS167 and is involved in membrane curvature sensing, endocytosis, and actin cytoskeleton organization at the plasma membrane. Its lipid-binding and cytoskeletal protein-binding activities are essential for proper endocytic vesicle formation and membrane trafficking. Loss of RVS161 in yeast is associated with reduced chronological and replicative lifespan, as proper endocytosis and membrane homeostasis are critical for nutrient sensing and cellular fitness during aging. The amphiphysin/BAR domain complex participates in sphingolipid-rich membrane domain organization, which connects to nutrient sensing pathways (TORC1/TORC2) that are central regulators of yeast longevity. Maintenance of membrane integrity and endocytic trafficking supports proteostasis and appropriate intercellular signaling, both of which are pro-longevity functions.",
  "confidence": 0.62,
  "key_pathways": [
    "endocytosis and membrane trafficking",
    "actin cytoskeleton organization",
    "lipid/membrane homeostasis"
  ],
  "mechanism_class": "other",
  "longevity_influence": "pro_longevity"
}

advisor

{
  "notes": "The model predicted pro_longevity but the ground truth is anti_longevity. The model's reasoning is internally consistent but factually incorrect - it claims that loss of RVS161 reduces lifespan, which would make it pro_longevity (supporting longevity when present). However, the GenAge database classifies RVS161 as anti_longevity, meaning deletion of RVS161 actually extends lifespan. The model's mechanistic reasoning about endocytosis, membrane trafficking, and BAR domain function is plausible but leads to the wrong conclusion. The model appears to have assumed that a protein involved in important cellular functions must be pro-longevity, without considering that RVS161 deletion could extend lifespan (anti_longevity classification). The confidence of 0.62 is moderate but still wrong.",
  "failure_mode": "confident_wrong",
  "answer_correct": false,
  "mechanism_correct": false,
  "reasoning_quality": 2,
  "ground_truth_questionable": false
}