The DNA Methylation Landscape of Enhancers in The Guinea Pig Hippocampus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the state of methylation of DNA molecules in the guinea pig hippocampus that are associated with either poised or active enhancers. METHODS: We used sequential chromatin immunoprecipitation-bisulfite-sequencing with an antibody to H3K4me1 to map the state of methylation of DNA that is found within enhancers. Actively transcribing transcription start sites were mapped by chromatin immunoprecipitation-sequencing with an antibody to RNApolII-PS5. Total DNA methylation was mapped using reduced representation bisulfite sequencing. RESULTS: DNA that overlaps with H3K4me1 binding regions in the genome is heavily methylated. However, DNA molecules that are found in H3K4me1 chromatin are hypomethylated, while DNA found in enhancers that are associated with active transcription is further demethylated. Differential methylation in enhancers is spotted in single CGs, bimodal and corresponds to transcription factor binding sites. CONCLUSION: Our study delineates the DNA methylation status of H3K4 me1-bound regions in the hippocampus in active and inactive genes.
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".