MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977109151 · doi:10.1002/bdra.23036

Hypothesis: The female excess in cranial neural tube defects reflects an epigenetic drag of the inactivating x chromosome on the molecular mechanisms of neural fold elevation

2012· article· en· W1977109151 on OpenAlexaff
D. M. Juriloff, Muriel J. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth Defects Research Part A Clinical and Molecular Teratology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyNeural tubeEpigeneticsExencephalyGeneticsDNA methylationSterilityNeural tube defectEmbryoGeneGene expressionFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Females have long been known to be in excess among cranial neural tube defect (NTD) cases. Up to two thirds of human anencephalics and mouse exencephalics from various genetic causes are female, but the cause of this female excess is unknown. It appears not to be attributable to gonadal hormones, developmental delay in females, or preferential death of affected males. Recent studies of the Trp53 mouse mutant showed that exencephaly susceptibility depends on the presence of two X chromosomes, not the absence of the Y. Over a decade ago, we hypothesized that the relevant difference between female and male mammalian embryos at the time of cranial neural tube closure is the fact that females methylate most of the DNA in the large inactive X chromosome after every cell division, reducing the methylation available for other needs in female cells. Recently, the Whitelaw laboratory identified several proteins in mice (Momme D genes) involved in epigenetic silencing and methylation and shared in the silencing of transgenes, retrotransposons, and the inactive-X, and suggested that the inactive-X acts as a "sink" for epigenetic silencing proteins. The "inactive-X sink" hypothesis can be used to suggest expected changes in sex ratio in cranial NTDs in response to various genetic or environmental alterations. We recommend that observation of sex ratio become a standard component of all NTD studies. We suggest that the female excess among cranial NTDs is an epigenetic phenomenon whose molecular investigation will produce insight into the mechanisms underlying NTDs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations59
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBirth Defects Research Part A Clinical and Molecular TeratologySame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207