Broad Epigenetic Signature of Maternal Care in the Brain of Adult Rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal care is associated with long-term effects on behavior and epigenetic programming of the NR3C1 (GLUCOCORTICOID RECEPTOR) gene in the hippocampus of both rats and humans. In the rat, these effects are reversed by cross-fostering, demonstrating that they are defined by epigenetic rather than genetic processes. However, epigenetic changes at a single gene promoter are unlikely to account for the range of outcomes and the persistent change in expression of hundreds of additional genes in adult rats in response to differences in maternal care. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We examine here using high-density oligonucleotide array the state of DNA methylation, histone acetylation and gene expression in a 7 million base pair region of chromosome 18 containing the NR3C1 gene in the hippocampus of adult rats. Natural variations in maternal care are associated with coordinate epigenetic changes spanning over a hundred kilobase pairs. The adult offspring of high compared to low maternal care mothers show epigenetic changes in promoters, exons, and gene ends associated with higher transcriptional activity across many genes within the locus examined. Other genes in this region remain unchanged, indicating a clustered yet specific and patterned response. Interestingly, the chromosomal region containing the protocadherin-α, -β, and -γ (Pcdh) gene families implicated in synaptogenesis show the highest differential response to maternal care. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The results suggest for the first time that the epigenetic response to maternal care is coordinated in clusters across broad genomic areas. The data indicate that the epigenetic response to maternal care involves not only single candidate gene promoters but includes transcriptional and intragenic sequences, as well as those residing distantly from transcription start sites. These epigenetic and transcriptional profiles constitute the first tiling microarray data set exploring the relationship between epigenetic modifications and RNA expression in both protein coding and non-coding regions across a chromosomal locus in the mammalian brain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".