MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992964343 · doi:10.4161/epi.5.8.13045

Regulating a master regulator

2010· review· en· W1992964343 on OpenAlexafffund
Arif Aziz, Qicai Liu, F. Jeffrey Dilworth

Bibliographic record

VenueEpigenetics · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMyoDBiologyPsychological repressionRegulatorMyoD ProteinPromoterRegulation of gene expressionTranscription factorTranscriptional regulationGeneticsPITX2Cell biologyGene expressionGeneHomeobox

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MyoD is a master regulator of the skeletal muscle gene expression program. ChIP-Seq analysis has recently revealed that MyoD binds to a large number of genomic loci in differentiating myoblasts, yet only activates transcription at a subset of these genes. Here we discuss recent data suggesting that the ability of MyoD to mediate gene expression is regulated through the function of Polycomb and Trithorax Group proteins. Based on studies of the muscle-specific myog gene, we propose a model where the transcriptional activators Mef2d and Six4 mediate recruitment of Trithorax Group proteins Ash2L/MLL2 and UTX to MyoD-bound promoters to overcome the Polycomb-mediated repression of muscle genes. Modulation of the interaction between Ash2L/MLL2 and Mef2d by the p38α MAPK signaling pathway in turns provides fine-tuning of the muscle-specific gene expression program. Thus Mef2d, Six4, and p38α MAPK function coordinately as regulators of a master regulator to mediate expression of MyoD target genes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations105
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpigeneticsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207