The Idd4 Locus Displays Sex-Specific Epistatic Effects on Type 1 Diabetes Susceptibility in Nonobese Diabetic Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nonobese diabetic (NOD) mouse recapitulates many aspects of the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes in humans, including inheritance as a complex trait. More than 20 Idd loci have been linked to type 1 diabetes susceptibility in NOD mice. Previously, we used linkage analysis of NOD crossed to the nonobese diabetes-resistant (NOR) strain and NOD congenic strains to map susceptibility to both spontaneous and cyclophosphamide-accelerated type 1 diabetes to the Idd4 locus on chromosome 11 that displayed a sex-specific effect on diabetes susceptibility. Here, we elucidate the complex genetic architecture of Idd4 by analysis of congenic strains on the NOD and NOR backgrounds. We previously refined Idd4.1 to 1.4 Mb and demonstrated an impact of this interval on type 1 interferon pathways in antigen-presenting cells. Here, we identify a second subregion, the 0.92 Mb Idd4.2 locus located telomeric to Idd4.1. Strikingly, Idd4.2 displayed a sex-specific, epistatic interaction with Idd4.1 in NOR.NOD congenic females that was not observed in syngenic males. Idd4.2 contains 29 genes, and promising candidates for the Idd4.2 effect on type 1 diabetes are described. These data demonstrate sex-dependent interaction effects on type 1 diabetes susceptibility and provide a framework for functional analysis of Idd4.2 candidate genes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".