MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019591119 · doi:10.1155/2012/392903

Ontogenetic Survey of Histone Modifications in an Annelid

2012· article· en· W2019591119 on OpenAlexafffund
Glenys Gibson, Corban Hart, Robyn Pierce, Vett K. Lloyd

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics Research International · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversityAcadia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversities Space Research AssociationAcadia University
KeywordsAnnelidOntogenyHistoneBiologyAnatomyBiochemistryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Histone modifications are widely recognized for their fundamental importance in regulating gene expression in embryonic development in a wide range of eukaryotes, but they have received relatively little attention in the development of marine invertebrates. We surveyed histone modifications throughout the development of a marine annelid, Polydora cornuta, to determine if modifications could be detected immunohistochemically and if there were characteristic changes in modifications throughout ontogeny (surveyed at representative stages from oocyte to adult). We found a common time of onset for three histone modifications in early cleavage (H3K14ac, H3K9me, and H3K4me2), some differences in the distribution of modifications among germ layers, differences in epifluorescence intensity in specific cell lineages suggesting that hyperacetylation (H3K14ac) and hypermethylation (H3K9me) occur during differentiation, and an overall decrease in the distribution of modifications from larvae to adults. Although preliminary, these results suggest that histone modifications are involved in activating early development and differentiation in a marine invertebrate.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetics Research InternationalSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207