MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142550096 · doi:10.1101/gr.111211.110

RNA sequencing reveals the role of splicing polymorphisms in regulating human gene expression

2010· article· en· W2142550096 on OpenAlexafffund
Emilie Lalonde, Kevin Ha, Zibo Wang, Amandine Bemmo, Claudia L. Kleinman, Tony Kwan, Tomi Pastinen, Jacek Majewski

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome CanadaCanada Research ChairsMcGill University
KeywordsBiologyExpression quantitative trait lociRNA splicingGeneticsGeneAlternative splicingSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGene expressionRegulation of gene expressionQuantitative trait locusComputational biologyRNAExonGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expression levels of many human genes are under the genetic control of expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs). Despite technological advances, the precise molecular mechanisms underlying most eQTLs remain elusive. Here, we use deep mRNA sequencing of two CEU individuals to investigate those mechanisms, with particular focus on the role of splicing control loci (sQTLs). We identify a large number of genes that are differentially spliced between the two samples and associate many of those differences with nearby single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Subsequently, we investigate the potential effect of splicing SNPs on eQTL control in general. We find a significant enrichment of alternative splicing (AS) events within a set of highly confident eQTL targets discovered in previous studies, suggesting a role of AS in regulating overall gene expression levels. Next, we demonstrate high correlation between the levels of mature (exonic) and unprocessed (intronic) RNA, implying that ∼75% of eQTL target variance can be explained by control at the level of transcription, but that the remaining 25% may be regulated co- or post-transcriptionally. We focus on eQTL targets with discordant mRNA and pre-mRNA expression patterns and use four examples: USMG5, MMAB, MRPL43, and OAS1, to dissect the exact downstream effects of the associated genetic variants.

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)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations122
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207