Monozygotic Twins Exhibit Numerous Epigenetic Differences: Clues to Twin Discordance?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this pilot study was to explore the putative molecular mechanisms underlying the phenotypic discordance of monozygotic (MZ) twins. Thus, patterns of epigenetic DNA modification were investigated in the 5'-regulatory region of the dopamine D2 receptor gene (DRD2) in two pairs of monozygotic twins, one concordant and one discordant for schizophrenia. The bisulfite DNA modification-based approach was used to fine-map methylated cytosines in DRD2 in genomic DNA extracted from lymphocytes. Numerous DNA methylation differences were identified in the analyzed region both within and between the pairs of MZ twins. "Epigenetic distances" between MZ twins were calculated and used for the comparison of twin DRD2 methylation profiles. It was detected that the affected twin from the pair discordant for schizophrenia was epigenetically "closer" to the affected concordant twins than to his unaffected MZ co-twin. Although the epigenetic analysis was conducted for only several hundred base pairs of DRD2, the fact that numerous studies identified nonuniform methylation patterns across the clones of bisulfite-modified DNA from the same individual, as well as nonuniform patterns across different individuals, argues for the universality of intra- and interindividual epigenetic variation. Epigenetic studies should provide insight into the molecular causes of differential susceptibility to a disease in genetically identical organisms that may generalize to singletons.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it