Using the histone H2a transcript as an endogenous standard to study relative transcript abundance during bovine early development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The requirement for sample standardization is basic to any relative RNA abundance assessment. In 2002, we published on the RNA abundance profiling of several housekeeping targets during early bovine embryonic development. It was then concluded that histone H2a was the most stable transcript across the studied developmental period. Since that time, several teams have applied this information, yet neglected to use the published set of primers. Here, we show that these other primer sets do not target the same histone H2a variant. Within the present report, the RNA abundance profiles of their respective targets, for example, histone H2a.1, H2a.z, and H2a.o were measured in developmental series spanning the immature oocyte to the blastocyst stage embryo. In order to more clearly define the conditions that impact the RNA abundance level measurement of these candidates, the state of polyadenylation and the origin of the transcript either from de novo transcription or from maternal stocks were taken into consideration. The histone H2a.z transcript is principally regulated by de novo transcription following embryonic genome activation, whereas the levels of H2a.1 and H2a.o variants are largely of maternal origin, conferring a more stable profile throughout the studied developmental window. The histone H2a.z was found solely in a polyadenylated state whereas the H2a.1 and H2a.o were found to be more abundant in a nonadenylated form. The presence of serum in the in vitro embryo production system also had some impact on the histone H2a.1 RNA level at the blastocyst stage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".