Skeletal muscle specific genes networks in cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While physiological differences across skeletal muscles have been described, the differential gene expression underlying them and the discovery of how they interact to perform specific biological processes are largely to be elucidated. The purpose of the present study was, firstly, to profile by cDNA microarrays the differential gene expression between two skeletal muscle types, Psoas major (PM) and Flexor digitorum (FD), in beef cattle and then to interpret the results in the context of a bovine gene coexpression network, detecting possible changes in connectivity across the skeletal muscle system. Eighty four genes were differentially expressed (DE) between muscles. Approximately 54% encoded metabolic enzymes and structural-contractile proteins. DE genes were involved in similar processes and functions, but the proportion of genes in each category varied within each muscle. A correlation matrix was obtained for 61 out of the 84 DE genes from a gene coexpression network. Different groups of coexpression were observed, the largest one having 28 metabolic and contractile genes, up-regulated in PM, and mainly encoding fast-glycolytic fibre structural components and glycolytic enzymes. In FD, genes related to cell support seemed to constitute its identity feature and did not positively correlate to the rest of DE genes in FD. Moreover, changes in connectivity for some DE genes were observed in the different gene ontologies. Our results confirm the existence of a muscle dependent transcription and coexpression pattern and suggest the necessity of integrating different muscle types to perform comprehensive networks for the transcriptional landscape of bovine skeletal muscle.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".