MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2205542261 · doi:10.1186/s12864-015-2264-z

Epigenetic modification with trichostatin A does not correct specific errors of somatic cell nuclear transfer at the transcriptomic level; highlighting the non-random nature of oocyte-mediated reprogramming errors

2016· article· en· W2205542261 on OpenAlexafffund
Sayyed Morteza Hosseini, Isabelle Dufort, Julie Nieminen, Fariba Moulavi, Hamid Ghanaei, Mahdi Hajian, Farnoosh Jafarpour, Mohsen Forouzanfar, Hamid Gourbai, Abdolhossein Shahverdi, Mohammad Hossein Nasr‐Esfahani, Marc‐André Sirard

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Genomics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAcademic Center for Education, Culture and ResearchRoyan InstituteUniversité Laval
KeywordsReprogrammingBiologyEpigeneticsSomatic cellTrichostatin ASomatic cell nuclear transferOocyteGeneticsComputational biologyTranscriptomeEpigenomicsEpigenesisDNA methylationCellEmbryoGeneHistoneGene expressionHistone deacetylaseEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The limited duration and compromised efficiency of oocyte-mediated reprogramming, which occurs during the early hours following somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), may significantly interfere with epigenetic reprogramming, contributing to the high incidence of ill/fatal transcriptional phenotypes and physiological anomalies occurring later during pre- and post-implantation events. A potent histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin A (TSA), was used to understand the effects of assisted epigenetic modifications on transcriptional profiles of SCNT blastocysts and to identify specific or categories of genes affected. RESULTS: TSA improved the yield and quality of in vitro embryo development compared to control (CTR-NT). Significance analysis of microarray results revealed that of 37,238 targeted gene transcripts represented on the microarray slide, a relatively small number of genes were differentially expressed in CTR-NT (1592 = 4.3 %) and TSA-NT (1907 = 5.1 %) compared to IVF embryos. For both SCNT groups, the majority of downregulated and more than half of upregulated genes were common and as much as 15 % of all deregulated transcripts were located on chromosome X. Correspondence analysis clustered CTR-NT and IVF transcriptomes close together regardless of the embryo production method, whereas TSA changed SCNT transcriptome to a very clearly separated cluster. Ontological classification of deregulated genes using IPA uncovered a variety of functional categories similarly affected in both SCNT groups with a preponderance of genes required for biological processes. Examination of genes involved in different canonical pathways revealed that the WNT and FGF pathways were similarly affected in both SCNT groups. Although TSA markedly changed epigenetic reprogramming of donor cells (DNA-methylation, H3K9 acetylation), reconstituted oocytes (5mC, 5hmC), and blastocysts (DNA-methylation, H3K9 acetylation), these changes did not recapitulate parallel marked changes in chromatin remodeling, and nascent mRNA and OCT4-EGFP expression of TSA-NT vs. CRT-NT embryos. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained suggest that despite the extensive reprogramming of donor cells that occurred by the blastocyst stage, SCNT-specific errors are of a non-random nature in bovine and are not responsive to epigenetic modifications by TSA.

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)0.001
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 score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations47
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC GenomicsSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207