Chromosome Conformation of Human Fibroblasts Grown in 3-Dimensional Spheroids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the study of interphase chromosome organization, genome-wide chromosome conformation capture (Hi-C) maps are often generated using 2-dimensional (2D) monolayer cultures. These 2D cells have morphological deviations from cells that exist in 3-dimensional (3D) tissues in vivo, and may not maintain the same chromosome conformation. We used Hi-C maps to test the extent of differences in chromosome conformation between human fibroblasts grown in 2D cultures and those grown in 3D spheroids. Significant differences in chromosome conformation were found between 2D cells and those grown in spheroids. Intra-chromosomal interactions were generally increased in spheroid cells, with a few exceptions, while inter-chromosomal interactions were generally decreased. Overall, chromosomes located closer to the nuclear periphery had increased intra-chromosomal contacts in spheroid cells, while those located more centrally had decreased interactions. This study highlights the necessity to conduct studies on the topography of the interphase nucleus under conditions that mimic an in vivo environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".