MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066158210 · doi:10.1089/cell.2010.0012

Investigating the Potential of Genes Preferentially Expressed in Oocyte to Induce Chromatin Remodeling in Somatic Cells

2010· article· en· W2066158210 on OpenAlexaff
Eve‐Lyne Sylvestre, Sophie Pennetier, Mariève Bureau, Claude Robert, Marc‐André Sirard

Bibliographic record

VenueCellular Reprogramming · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyReprogrammingChromatinCell biologySomatic cellChromatin remodelingEpigeneticsHomeobox protein NANOGGeneticsOocyteH3K4me3GeneGene expressionEmbryonic stem cellInduced pluripotent stem cellPromoterEmbryo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oocyte capacity to rejuvenate a differentiated nucleus to restart the proper embryonic program has been highly conserved between vertebrate species. In view of the recent progress to induce pluripotency in somatic cells with stemness genes, we investigated the potential of oocyte genes to contribute to chromatin rearrangements in somatic cells. We selected conserved genes that are naturally expressed mainly in oocytes and that were susceptible to play a role in reprogramming during early embryogenesis. We induced their expression by transient transfection in HEK293 cells. We then assessed whether they had a global impact on epigenetic events such as histone core modifications, and also on transcription and expression of pluripotency-associated transcription factors. Nucleoplasmin 2 (NPM2), activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AICDA), and Geminin (GMNN) overexpression induced differences in histone core modifications (methylation and acetylation). AICDA and NPM2 also influenced RNA neosynthesis. NPM2, GMNN, and STELLA induced overexpression of well-known pluripotency transcription factors. Overall, AICDA, GMNN, NPM2, and STELLA influenced at least one of the aspects analyzed. Their potential could be useful in increasing the cell receptivity to pluripotency induction.

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)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellular ReprogrammingSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207