MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1555243468 · doi:10.3390/genes6030685

The Structural Determinants behind the Epigenetic Role of Histone Variants

2015· review· en· W1555243468 on OpenAlexaff
Manjinder S. Cheema, Juan Ausió

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistone codeHistone methylationEpigeneticsHistoneHistone H1NucleosomeChromatinBiologyGeneticsHistone methyltransferaseHistone H2AChromatin remodelingEpigenomicsCell biologyDNA methylationDNAGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Histone variants are an important part of the histone contribution to chromatin epigenetics. In this review, we describe how the known structural differences of these variants from their canonical histone counterparts impart a chromatin signature ultimately responsible for their epigenetic contribution. In terms of the core histones, H2A histone variants are major players while H3 variant CenH3, with a controversial role in the nucleosome conformation, remains the genuine epigenetic histone variant. Linker histone variants (histone H1 family) haven't often been studied for their role in epigenetics. However, the micro-heterogeneity of the somatic canonical forms of linker histones appears to play an important role in maintaining the cell-differentiated states, while the cell cycle independent linker histone variants are involved in development. A picture starts to emerge in which histone H2A variants, in addition to their individual specific contributions to the nucleosome structure and dynamics, globally impair the accessibility of linker histones to defined chromatin locations and may have important consequences for determining different states of chromatin metabolism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenesSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207