Human cis-acting elements regulating escape from X-chromosome inactivation function in mouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A long-standing question concerning X-chromosome inactivation (XCI) has been how some genes avoid the otherwise stable chromosome-wide heterochromatinization of the inactive X chromosome. As 20% or more of human X-linked genes escape from inactivation, such genes are an important contributor to sex differences in gene expression. Although both human and mouse have genes that escape from XCI, more genes escape in humans than mice, with human escape genes often clustering in larger domains than the single escape genes of mouse. Mouse models offer a well-characterized and readily manipulated system in which to study XCI, but given the differences in genes that escape it is unclear whether the mechanism of escape gene regulation is conserved. To address conservation of the process and the potential to identify elements by modelling human escape gene regulation using mouse, we integrated a human and a mouse BAC each containing an escape gene and flanking subject genes at the mouse X-linked Hprt gene. Escape-level expression and corresponding low promoter DNA methylation of human genes RPS4X and CITED1 demonstrated that the mouse system is capable of recognizing human elements and therefore can be used as a model for further refinement of critical elements necessary for escape from XCI in humans.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".