Clock-dependent chromatin topology modulates circadian transcription and behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The circadian clock in animals orchestrates widespread oscillatory gene expression programs, which underlie 24-h rhythms in behavior and physiology. Several studies have shown the possible roles of transcription factors and chromatin marks in controlling cyclic gene expression. However, how daily active enhancers modulate rhythmic gene transcription in mammalian tissues is not known. Using circular chromosome conformation capture (4C) combined with sequencing (4C-seq), we discovered oscillatory promoter–enhancer interactions along the 24-h cycle in the mouse liver and kidney. Rhythms in chromatin interactions were abolished in arrhythmic Bmal1 knockout mice. Deleting a contacted intronic enhancer element in the Cryptochrome 1 (Cry1) gene was sufficient to compromise the rhythmic chromatin contacts in tissues. Moreover, the deletion reduced the daily dynamics of Cry1 transcriptional burst frequency and, remarkably, shortened the circadian period of locomotor activity rhythms. Our results establish oscillating and clock-controlled promoter–enhancer looping as a regulatory layer underlying circadian transcription and behavior.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".