MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019530604 · doi:10.1093/nar/gkg742

Retrovirus silencer blocking by the cHS4 insulator is CTCF independent

2003· article· en· W2019530604 on OpenAlexafffund
Shao Q. Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueNucleic Acids Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenStem Cell Network
KeywordsSilencerCTCFRetrovirusGene silencingBiologyTransgeneHypersensitive siteInsulator (electricity)Molecular biologyEnhancerGeneticsGeneGene expressionMaterials scienceOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silencing of retrovirus vectors poses a significant obstacle to genetic manipulation of stem cells and their use in gene therapy. We describe a mammalian silencer blocking assay using insulator elements positioned between retrovirus silencer elements and an LCRbeta-globin reporter transgene. In transgenic mice, we show that retrovirus silencers are blocked by the cHS4 insulator. Silencer blocking is independent of the CTCF binding site and is most effective when flanking the internal reporter transgene. These data distinguish silencer blocking activity by cHS4 from its enhancer blocking activity. Retrovirus vectors can be created at high titer with one but not two internal dimer cHS4 cores. cHS4 in the LTRs has no effect on expression in transduced F9 cells, suggesting that position effect blocking is not sufficient to escape silencing. The Drosophila insulators gypsy and Scs fail to block silencing in transgenic mice, but gypsy stimulates vector expression 2-fold when located in the LTRs of an infectious retrovirus. The silencer blocking assay complements existing insulator assays in mammalian cells, provides new insight into mechanisms of insulation and is a valuable tool to identify additional silencer blocking insulators that cooperate with cHS4 to improve stem cell retrovirus vector design.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations62
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNucleic Acids ResearchSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207