Histones and nucleosomes in <i>Cancer</i> sperm (Decapod: <i>Crustacea</i>) previously described as lacking basic DNA‐associated proteins: A new model of sperm chromatin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date several studies have been carried out which indicate that DNA of crustacean sperm is neither bound nor organized by basic proteins and, contrary to the rest of spermatozoa, do not contain highly packaged chromatin. Since this is the only known case of this type among metazoan cells, we have re-examined the composition, and partially the structure, of the mature sperm chromatin of Cancer pagurus, which has previously been described as lacking basic DNA-associated proteins. The results we present here show that: (a) sperm DNA of C. pagurus is bound by histones forming nucleosomes of 170 base pairs, (b) the ratio [histones/DNA] in sperm of two Cancer species is 0.5 and 0.6 (w/w). This ratio is quite lower than the proportion [proteins/DNA] that we found in other sperm nuclei with histones or protamines, whose value is from 1.0 to 1.2 (w/w), (c) histone H4 is highly acetylated in mature sperm chromatin of C. pagurus. Other histones (H3 and H2B) are also acetylated, though the level is much lower than that of histone H4. The low ratio of histones to DNA, along with the high level of acetylation of these proteins, explains the non-compact, decondensed state of the peculiar chromatin in the sperm studied here. In the final section we offer an explanation for the necessity of such decondensed chromatin during gamete fertilization of this species.
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) | 0.000 | 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".