MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944893167 · doi:10.1101/gr.243394.118

The <i>C. elegans</i> embryonic transcriptome with tissue, time, and alternative splicing resolution

2019· article· en· W2944893167 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adam Warner, Louis Gevirtzman, LaDeana Hillier, Brent Ewing, R Waterston

Bibliographic record

VenueGenome Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthSimon Fraser University
KeywordsBiologyCaenorhabditis elegansGeneRNA splicingTranscriptomeGeneticsAlternative splicingExonEmbryonic stem cellGene expressionGastrulationGene expression profilingIntronComputational biologyRNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have used RNA-seq in Caenorhabditis elegans to produce transcription profiles for seven specific embryonic cell populations from gastrulation to the onset of terminal differentiation. The expression data for these seven cell populations, covering major cell lineages and tissues in the worm , reveal the complex and dynamic changes in gene expression, both spatially and temporally. Also, within genes, start sites and exon usage can be highly differential, producing transcripts that are specific to developmental periods or cell lineages. We have also found evidence of novel exons and introns, as well as differential usage of SL1 and SL2 splice leaders. By combining this data set with the modERN ChIP-seq resource, we are able to support and predict gene regulatory relationships. The detailed information on differences and similarities between gene expression in cell lineages and tissues should be of great value to the community and provides a framework for the investigation of expression in individual cells.

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)0.001
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 score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations30
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenome ResearchSame topicGenetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model OrganismsFrench-language works237,207