Epigenetic changes and nontargeted radiation effects—Is there a link?
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
It is now well accepted that the effects of ionizing radiation (IR) exposure can be noticed far beyond the borders of the directly irradiated tissue. IR can affect neighboring cells in the proximity, giving rise to a bystander effect. IR effects can also span several generations and influence the progeny of exposed parents, leading to transgeneration effects. Bystander and transgeneration IR effects are linked to the phenomenon of the IR-induced genome instability that manifests itself as chromosome aberrations, gene mutations, late cell death, and aneuploidy. While the occurrence of the above-mentioned phenomena is well documented, the exact mechanisms that lead to their development have still to be delineated. Evidence suggests that the IR-induced genome instability, bystander, and transgeneration effects may be epigenetically mediated. The epigenetic changes encompass DNA methylation, histone modification, and RNA-associated silencing. Recent studies demonstrated that IR exposure alters epigenetic parameters in the directly exposed tissues and in the distant bystander tissues. Transgeneration radiation effects were also proposed to be of an epigenetic nature. We will discuss the role of the epigenetic mechanisms in radiation responses, bystander effects, and transgeneration effects.
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) | 0.001 | 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