Multiple epigenetic maintenance factors implicated by the loss of Mll2 in mouse development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epigenesis is the process whereby the daughters of a dividing cell retain a chromatin state determined before cell division. The best-studied cases involve the inheritance of heterochromatic chromosomal domains, and little is known about specific gene regulation by epigenetic mechanisms. Recent evidence shows that epigenesis pivots on methylation of nucleosomes at histone 3 lysines 4, 9 or 27. Bioinformatics indicates that mammals have several enzymes for each of these methylations, including at least six histone 3 lysine 4 methyltransferases. To look for evidence of gene-specific epigenetic regulation in mammalian development, we examined one of these six, Mll2, using a multipurpose allele in the mouse to ascertain the loss-of-function phenotype. Loss of Mll2 slowed growth, increased apoptosis and retarded development, leading to embryonic failure before E11.5. Using chimera experiments, we demonstrated that Mll2 is cell-autonomously required. Evidence for gene-specific regulation was also observed. Although Mox1 and Hoxb1 expression patterns were correctly established, they were not maintained in the absence of Mll2, whereas Wnt1 and Otx2 were. The Mll2 loss-of-function phenotype is different from that of its sister gene Mll, and they regulate different Hox complex genes during ES cell differentiation. Therefore, these two closely related epigenetic factors play different roles in development and maintain distinct gene expression patterns. This suggests that other epigenetic factors also regulate particular patterns and that development entails networks of epigenetic specificities.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".