MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011000812 · doi:10.2217/epi.10.61

Genetic and Epigenetic Dysregulation of Imprinted Genes In The Brain

2010· review· en· W2011000812 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristin D. Kernohan, Nathalie G. Bérubé

Bibliographic record

VenueEpigenomics · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInternational Rett Syndrome Foundation
KeywordsGenomic imprintingEpigeneticsBiologyImprinting (psychology)GeneGeneticsFunction (biology)AlleleRegulation of gene expressionLoss functionPhenotypeEpigenesisDNA methylationGene expressionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Imprinted genes are an epigenetically regulated class of genes that are preferentially expressed from one parental allele. A number of these genes are crucial for placental function and embryonic growth in mice and humans. Disruption of imprinted genes is also associated with several neurodevelopmental disorders, although the role of genomic imprinting in the brain remains largely unresolved. In this article, we describe current knowledge on the various epigenetic mechanisms that can drive monoallelic expression, provide examples of imprinted genes with relevant function in the brain and discuss imprinted gene deregulation in various neurodevelopmental disorders. Continued efforts in this field will be necessary in order to fully appreciate how the modulation of imprinted gene expression is essential to achieve normal development, and therefore function, of the mammalian nervous system.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations20
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpigenomicsSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207