Investigating the Potential of Genes Preferentially Expressed in Oocyte to Induce Chromatin Remodeling in Somatic Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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) | 0.001 | 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".