MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018032747 · doi:10.1291/hypres.27.203

Combining Congenic Coverage with Gene Profiling in Search of Candidates for Blood Pressure Quantitative Trait Loci in Dahl Rats

2004· article· en· W2018032747 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchKidney Foundation of Canada
KeywordsQuantitative trait locusCongenicBiologyGeneticsCandidate geneGeneGene expression profilingExpressed sequence tagGenetic linkageGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chromosomes (Chr) 10 and 16 of the Dahl salt-sensitive (S) rat harbor quantitative trait loci (QTLs) for blood pressure (BP). To facilitate gene discovery of these QTLs, gene profiling based on microarrays was combined with fine QTL mapping to identify potential candidate genes that are differentially expressed. First, the region harboring the BP QTL on Chr 16 was narrowed by comparative congenic mapping. In this endeavor, a number of new chromosome markers were generated and used to physically define the chromosome interval in question. Second, in an effort to minimize the costs of gene profiling without sacrificing the chance of gene discovery, a combination congenic strain was produced by replacing one segment of Chr 10 along with one segment of Chr 16 of the hypertensive S rat by those of the normotensive Lewis (LEW) rat. Both of these regions are known to contain BP QTLs. Third, kidneys of this combination congenic strain and the S strain were employed for expression profiling studies. Finally, a comparison between the two strains yielded a number of potentially differentially expressed candidates. Six Established Sequence Tags (ESTs)/genes among them were located in Chr 10 regions and 1 was found in a Chr 16 region, and the genetic make-ups of all these regions were shown to be different between S and LEW. However, none of these ESTs/genes identified by gene profiling were located in an interval containing a QTL. Thus, the present study highlights the importance of correlating the results of gene expression profiling with fine congenic mapping.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.273 · 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