MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031015166 · doi:10.1101/sqb.2010.75.012

Changes in Chromatin Fiber Density as a Marker for Pluripotency

2010· article· en· W2031015166 on OpenAlexafffund
Eden Fussner, Kashif Ahmed, Hesam Dehghani, Mike Strauss, David P. Bazett‐Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChromatinCell biologyFiberChemistryBiophysicsBiologyBiochemistryDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive alterations in chromatin structure at the nucleosome level are linked to developmental potential. We hypothesize that such alterations in chromatin structure reflect and, to some extent, depend on the large-scale reorganization of the nuclear landscape. We have used electron spectroscopic imaging (ESI) to visualize chromatin organization at the mesoscale level of resolution in both pluripotent and differentiated cell types. Pluripotent cells are characterized by a highly dispersed mesh of 10-nm chromatin fibers that fill the nuclear volume. In contrast, differentiated cells display a propensity to form compact chromatin domains that lead to large regions of the nucleus devoid of DNA. Surprisingly, ESI combined with tomography methods reveals that the compact chromatin domains consist of 10-nm rather than 30-nm chromatin fibers. We propose that the transition between compact silent chromatin and open transcriptionally poised or active chromatin is based on the modulation of the packing density of 10-nm fibers rather than a transition between 10- and 30-nm fiber types.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative BiologySame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207