MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122510667 · doi:10.1093/molehr/gat022

Male-driven de novo mutations in haploid germ cells

2013· review· en· W2122510667 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie-Chantal Grégoire, Julien Massonneau, Olivier Simard, Alexandre Gouraud, Marc-André Brazeau, Martin Arguin, F. Leduc, Guylain Boissonneault

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Human Reproduction · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsGametogenesisContext (archaeology)ChromatinGermlineGerm cellMeiosisDNACell biologyGeneEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the sequence level, genetic diversity is provided by de novo transmittable mutations that may act as a substrate for natural selection. The gametogenesis process itself is considered more likely to induce endogenous mutations and a clear male bias has been demonstrated from recent next-generation sequencing analyses. As new experimental evidence accumulates, the post-meiotic events of the male gametogenesis (spermiogenesis) appear as an ideal context to induce de novo genetic polymorphism transmittable to the next generation. It may prove to be a major component of the observed male mutation bias. As spermatids undergo chromatin remodeling, transient endogenous DNA double-stranded breaks are produced and trigger a DNA damage response. In these haploid cells, one would expect that the non-templated, DNA end-joining repair processes may generate a repertoire of sequence alterations in every sperm cell potentially transmittable to the next generation. This may therefore represent a novel physiological mechanism contributing to genetic diversity and evolution.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations47
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Human ReproductionSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207