X‐chromosome inactivation patterns in monozygotic twins and sib pairs discordant for nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonsyndromic clefts of the lip and/or palate are common birth defects with a strong genetic component. Based on unequal gender ratios for clefting phenotypes, evidence for linkage to the X chromosome and the occurrence of several X-linked clefting syndromes, we investigated the role of skewed X chromosome inactivation (XCI) in orofacial clefts. Our samples consisted of female monozygotic (MZ) twins (n = 8) and sister pairs (n = 152) discordant for nonsyndromic clefting. We measured the XCI pattern in peripheral blood lymphocyte DNA using a methylation based androgen receptor gene assay. Skewing of XCI was defined as the deviation in inactivation pattern from a 50:50 ratio. Our analysis revealed no significant difference in the degree of skewing between twin pairs (P = 0.3). However, borderline significant differences were observed in the sister pairs (P = 0.02), with the cleft lip with cleft palate group showing the most significant result (P = 0.01). We did not find evidence for involvement of skewed XCI in the discordance for clefting in our sample of female MZ twins. However, results from the paired sister study suggest the potential contribution of skewed XCI to orofacial clefting, particularly cleft lip and palate.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".