An Evolutionary Scenaio for Genomic Imprinting of Impact Lying between Nonimprinted Neighbors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mouse Impact is the sole imprinted gene mapped to chromosome 18 to date. Despite its remarkable evolutionary conservation, human IMPACT was shown to escape genomic imprinting. Here we identified Hrh4 and Osbpl1 as the distal and proximal nearest neighbors of Impact, respectively, and found that both genes are expressed biallelically. Thus, in contrast with most imprinted genes, Impact fails to show apparent physical clustering with other imprinted genes. Since Impact not only lies in an intergenic region but also consists of 11 exons, it does not seem to be an imprinted gene generated by a retrotransposition. Hazardous effects of overexpressed Impact, a genomic segment containing paralogues of Hrh4 and Osbpl1 but not of Impact, and enhanced promoter activity in the mouse led us to propose an alternative model. This model assumes that segmental duplication followed by enhancement of the promoter activity in the lineage to mouse is responsible for the species-specific imprinting of Impact.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".