MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507700176 · doi:10.1002/jcp.25580

Meta‐Analysis of Transcriptome Regulation During Induction to Cardiac Myocyte Fate From Mouse and Human Fibroblasts

2016· review· en· W2507700176 on OpenAlexaff
Shima Rastegar‐Pouyani, Niusha Khazaei, Ping Wee, Moein Yaqubi, Abdulshakour Mohammadnia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular Physiology · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranscriptomeMyocyteCell biologyCardiac myocyteBiologyGene expressionGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ectopic expression of a defined set of transcription factors (TFs) can directly convert fibroblasts into a cardiac myocyte cell fate. Beside inefficiency in generating induced cardiomyocytes (iCMs), the molecular mechanisms that regulate this process remained to be well defined. The main purpose of this study was to provide better insight on the transcriptome regulation and to introduce a new strategy for candidating TFs for the transdifferentiation process. Eight mouse and three human high quality microarray data sets were analyzed to find differentially expressed genes (DEGs), which we integrated with TF-binding sites and protein-protein interactions to construct gene regulatory and protein-protein interaction networks. Topological and biological analyses of constructed gene networks revealed the main regulators and most affected biological processes. The DEGs could be categorized into two distinct groups, first, up-regulated genes that are mainly involved in cardiac-specific processes and second, down-regulated genes that are mainly involved in fibroblast-specific functions. Gata4, Mef2a, Tbx5, Tead4 TFs were identified as main regulators of cardiac-specific gene expression program; and Trp53, E2f1, Myc, Sfpi1, Lmo2, and Meis1 were identified as TFs which mainly regulate the expression of fibroblast-specific genes. Furthermore, we compared gene expression profiles and identified TFs between mouse and human to find the similarities and differences. In summary, our strategy of meta-analyzing the data of high-throughput techniques by computational approaches, besides revealing the mechanisms involved in the regulation of the gene expression program, also suggests a new approach for increasing the efficiency of the direct reprogramming of fibroblasts into iCMs. J. Cell. Physiol. 232: 2053-2062, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular PhysiologySame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207