MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096340328 · doi:10.1093/hmg/dds063

Tbx1 is a negative modulator of Mef2c

2012· article· en· W2096340328 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Luna Simona Pane, Zhen Zhang, Rosa Ferrentino, Tuong Huynh, Luisa Cutillo, Antonio Baldini

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Molecular Genetics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsEuropean Commission
KeywordsMEF2CTBX1BiologyTranscription factorTranscriptomeCell biologyGeneticsMutantGeneGene expressionPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The developmental role of the T-box transcription factor Tbx1 is exquisitely dosage-sensitive. In this study, we performed a microarray-based transcriptome analysis of E9.5 embryo tissues across a previously generated Tbx1 mouse allelic series. This analysis identified several genes whose expression was affected by Tbx1 dosage. Interestingly, we found that the expression of the gene encoding the cardiogenic transcription factor Mef2c was negatively correlated to Tbx1 dosage. In vivo data revealed Mef2c up-regulation in the second heart field (SHF) of Tbx1 null mutant embryos compared with wild-type littermates at E9.5. Conversely, Mef2c expression was decreased in the SHF and in somites of Tbx1 gain-of-function mutants. These results are consistent with the described role of Tbx1 in suppressing cardiac progenitor cell differentiation and indicate also a negative effect of Tbx1 on Mef2c during skeletal muscle differentiation. We show that Tbx1 occupies conserved regulatory regions of the Mef2c locus, suggesting a direct effect on Mef2c transcription. However, we also show that Tbx1 interferes with the Gata4→ Mef2c regulatory pathway. Overall, our study uncovered a target of Tbx1 with critical developmental roles, so highlighting the power of the dosage gradient approach that we used.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations44
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Molecular GeneticsSame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207