MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000481188 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkn737

CRX controls retinal expression of the X-linked juvenile retinoschisis (RS1) gene

2008· article· en· W2000481188 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Langmann, Christine Chieh-Lin Lai, Karin Weigelt, Beatrice M. Tam, Regina Warneke-Wittstock, Orson L. Moritz, Bernhard H. F. Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyChromatin immunoprecipitationHomeoboxReporter geneGeneticsMolecular biologyTransgeneRetinaRegulation of gene expressionCell biologyGene expressionGenePromoterNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

X-linked juvenile retinoschisis is a heritable condition of the retina in males caused by mutations in the RS1 gene. Still, the cellular function and retina-specific expression of RS1 are poorly understood. To address the latter issue, we characterized the minimal promoter driving expression of RS1 in the retina. Binding site prediction, site-directed mutagenesis, and reporter assays suggest an essential role of two nearby cone-rod homeobox (CRX)-responsive elements (CRE) in the proximal -177/+32 RS1 promoter. Chromatin immunoprecipitation associates the RS1 promoter in vivo with CRX, the coactivators CBP, P300, GCN5 and acetylated histone H3. Transgenic Xenopus laevis expressing a green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter under the control of RS1 promoter sequences show that the -177/+32 fragment drives GFP expression in photoreceptors and bipolar cells. Mutating either of the two conserved CRX binding sites results in strongly decreased RS1 expression. Despite the presence of sequence motifs in the promoter, NRL and NR2E3 appear not to be essential for RS1 expression. Together, our in vitro and in vivo results indicate that two CRE sites in the minimal RS1 promoter region control retinal RS1 expression and establish CRX as a key factor driving this expression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations25
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207