MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321701337 · doi:10.1080/21624054.2016.1156835

Hitting two birds with one stone: The unforeseen consequences of nested gene knockouts in<i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>

2016· article· en· W2321701337 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Jovelin, Asher D. Cutter

Bibliographic record

VenueWorm · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneBiologyGeneticsGene knockoutGene predictionPhenotypeIntronPair-rule geneGenomeComputational biologyRegulation of gene expressionRegulator gene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nested genes represent an intriguing form of non-random genomic organization in which the boundaries of one gene are fully contained within another, longer host gene. The C. elegans genome contains over 10,000 nested genes, 92% of which are ncRNAs, which occur inside 16% of the protein coding gene complement. Host genes are longer than non-host coding genes, owing to their longer and more numerous introns. Indel alleles are available for nearly all of these host genes that simultaneously alter the nested gene, raising the possibility of nested gene disruption contributing to phenotypes that might be attributed to the host gene. Such dual-knockouts could represent a source of misinterpretation about host gene function. Dual-knockouts might also provide a novel source of synthetic phenotypes that reveal the functional effects of ncRNA genes, whereby the host gene disruption acts as a perturbed genetic background to help unmask ncRNA phenotypes.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWormSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207