MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622791909 · doi:10.1002/bies.201700042

Mechanisms of suppression: The wiring of genetic resilience

2017· review· en· W2622791909 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Human Genome Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsBiologyPenetranceGeneticsAllelePhenotypeGenomeGeneSuppressorMutantDiseaseComputational biologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent analysis of genome sequences has identified individuals that are healthy despite carrying severe disease-associated mutations. A possible explanation is that these individuals carry a second genomic perturbation that can compensate for the detrimental effects of the disease allele, a phenomenon referred to as suppression. In model organisms, suppression interactions are generally divided into two classes: genomic suppressors which are secondary mutations in the genome that bypass a mutant phenotype, and dosage suppression interactions in which overexpression of a suppressor gene rescues a mutant phenotype. Here, we describe the general properties of genomic and dosage suppression, with an emphasis on the budding yeast. We propose that suppression interactions between genetic variants are likely relevant for determining the penetrance of human traits. Consequently, an understanding of suppression mechanisms may guide the discovery of protective variants in healthy individuals that carry disease alleles, which could direct the rational design of new therapeutics.

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.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.338 · 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