MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774801370 · doi:10.3791/56085

Generation of Native Chromatin Immunoprecipitation Sequencing Libraries for Nucleosome Density Analysis

2017· article· en· W2774801370 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Lorzadeh, Rodrigo Lopez Gutierrez, Linda Jackson, Michelle Moksa, Martin Hirst

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visualized Experiments · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreBC Cancer Agency
FundersTerry Fox Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome British Columbia
KeywordsNucleosomeMicrococcal nucleaseChromatin immunoprecipitationHistone codeChromatinHistoneComputational biologyChIP-on-chipChIP-sequencingHistone octamerBiologyGeneticsCell biologyDNAGeneGene expressionPromoter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a modified native chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq) experimental protocol compatible with a Gaussian mixture distribution based analysis methodology (nucleosome density ChIP-seq; ndChIP-seq) that enables the generation of combined measurements of micrococcal nuclease (MNase) accessibility with histone modification genome-wide. Nucleosome position and local density, and the posttranslational modification of their histone subunits, act in concert to regulate local transcription states. Combinatorial measurements of nucleosome accessibility with histone modification generated by ndChIP-seq allows for the simultaneous interrogation of these features. The ndChIP-seq methodology is applicable to small numbers of primary cells inaccessible to cross-linking based ChIP-seq protocols. Taken together, ndChIP-seq enables the measurement of histone modification in combination with local nucleosome density to obtain new insights into shared mechanisms that regulate RNA transcription within rare primary cell populations.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.347 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visualized ExperimentsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207