MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060012727 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009129

High Nucleosome Occupancy Is Encoded at Human Regulatory Sequences

2010· article· en· W2060012727 on OpenAlexafffund
Desiree Tillo, N. Kaplan, Irene K. Moore, Yvonne Fondufe‐Mittendorf, Andrea J. Gossett, Yair Field, Jason D. Lieb, Jonathan Widom, Eran Segal, Timothy R. Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome CanadaOntario GenomicsOntario Genomics InstituteCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsNucleosomeChromatinEnhancerPromoterOccupancyBiologyHistoneLinker DNAChromatosomeRegulatory sequenceGeneticsTranscription factorDNAComputational biologyGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Active eukaryotic regulatory sites are characterized by open chromatin, and yeast promoters and transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) typically have low intrinsic nucleosome occupancy. Here, we show that in contrast to yeast, DNA at human promoters, enhancers, and TFBSs generally encodes high intrinsic nucleosome occupancy. In most cases we examined, these elements also have high experimentally measured nucleosome occupancy in vivo. These regions typically have high G+C content, which correlates positively with intrinsic nucleosome occupancy, and are depleted for nucleosome-excluding poly-A sequences. We propose that high nucleosome preference is directly encoded at regulatory sequences in the human genome to restrict access to regulatory information that will ultimately be utilized in only a subset of differentiated cells.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations176
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207