MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046155010 · doi:10.1126/science.1228633

An Exon Splice Enhancer Primes IGF2:IGF2R Binding Site Structure and Function Evolution

2012· article· en· W2046155010 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Williams, H. H. Hoppe, Dellel Rezgui, Madeleine Strickland, Briony E. Forbes, Frank Grützner, Susana Frago, Rosamund Z. Ellis, Pakorn Wattana‐Amorn, Stuart Prince, Oliver Zaccheo, Catherine M. Nolan, Andrew J. Mungall, E. Yvonne Jones, Matthew P. Crump, A. Bassim Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre
FundersCancer Research UKWellcome Trust
KeywordsEnhancerExonspliceFunction (biology)GeneticsComputational biologyBiologyGeneTranscription factor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Placental development and genomic imprinting coevolved with parental conflict over resource distribution to mammalian offspring. The imprinted genes IGF2 and IGF2R code for the growth promoter insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF2) and its inhibitor, mannose 6-phosphate (M6P)/IGF2 receptor (IGF2R), respectively. M6P/IGF2R of birds and fish do not recognize IGF2. In monotremes, which lack imprinting, IGF2 specifically bound M6P/IGF2R via a hydrophobic CD loop. We show that the DNA coding the CD loop in monotremes functions as an exon splice enhancer (ESE) and that structural evolution of binding site loops (AB, HI, FG) improved therian IGF2 affinity. We propose that ESE evolution led to the fortuitous acquisition of IGF2 binding by M6P/IGF2R that drew IGF2R into parental conflict; subsequent imprinting may then have accelerated affinity maturation.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 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

Citations53
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207