How many remodelers does it take to make a brain? Diverse and cooperative roles of ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling complexes in developmentThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 28th International West Coast Chromatin and Chromosome Conference, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of a metazoan from a single-celled zygote to a complex multicellular organism requires elaborate and carefully regulated programs of gene expression. However, the tight packaging of genomic DNA into chromatin makes genes inaccessible to the cellular machinery and must be overcome by the processes of chromatin remodeling; in addition, chromatin remodeling can preferentially silence genes when their expression is not required. One class of chromatin remodelers, ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling enzymes, can slide nucleosomes along the DNA to make specific DNA sequences accessible or inaccessible to regulators at a particular stage of development. While all ATPases in the SWI2/SNF2 superfamily share the fundamental ability to alter DNA accessibility in chromatin, they do not act alone, but rather, are subunits of a large assortment of protein complexes. Recent studies illuminate common themes by which the subunit compositions of chromatin-remodeling complexes specify the developmental roles that chromatin remodelers play in specific tissues and at specific stages of development, in response to specific signaling pathways and transcription factors. In this review, we will discuss the known roles in metazoan development of 3 major subfamilies of chromatin-remodeling complexes: the SNF2, ISWI, and CHD subfamilies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".