MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078283036 · doi:10.4161/epi.6.12.18206

Dramatic replacement of histone variants during genome remodeling in nuclear-transferred embryos

2011· article· en· W2078283036 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Buhe Nashun, Tomohiko Akiyama, Masataka G. Suzuki, Fugaku Aoki

Bibliographic record

VenueEpigenetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsBiologyHistoneChromatinTotipotentHistone H3Chromatin remodelingCell biologyGeneticsEmbryoHistone methylationSomatic cellHistone H2AZygoteGenomePronucleusDNAEmbryonic stem cellEmbryogenesisDNA methylationGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genome of differentiated somatic nuclei is remodeled to a totipotent state when they are transplanted into enucleated oocytes. To clarify the mechanism of this genome remodeling, we analyzed changes in the composition of core histone variants in nuclear-transferred embryos, since recent evidence has revealed that chromatin structure can be remodeled as a result of variant histone replacement. We found that the donor cell-derived histone H3 variants H3.1, H3.2, and H3.3, as well as H2A and H2A.Z, were rapidly eliminated from the chromatin of nuclei transplanted into enucleated oocytes. Accompanying this removal, oocyte-stored histone H3 variants and H2A.X were incorporated into the transplanted nuclei, while the incorporation of H2A and H2A.Z was minimal or not detected. The incorporation of these variant histones was DNA replication-independent. These results suggest that most core histone H2A and H3 components are dynamically exchanged between donor nuclei and recipient cytoplasm, which further suggests that replacement of donor cell histones with oocyte-stored histones may play a key role in genome remodeling in nuclear-transferred embryos. In addition, the incorporation patterns of all of the histone variants in the nuclear-transferred embryos were virtually the same as in the fertilized embryos. Only the incorporation pattern of H3.1 differed; it was incorporated into the transplanted donor nuclei, but not in the pronuclei of fertilized embryos. This result suggests that the incorporation of H3.1 has a detrimental effect on the process of genome remodeling and contributes to the low success rate of somatic nuclear cloning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.286
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpigeneticsSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207