Large-scale mammalian genome rearrangements coincide with chromatin interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MOTIVATION: Genome rearrangements drastically change gene order along great stretches of a chromosome. There has been initial evidence that these apparently non-local events in the 1D sense may have breakpoints that are close in the 3D sense. We harness the power of the Double Cut and Join model of genome rearrangement, along with Hi-C chromosome conformation capture data to test this hypothesis between human and mouse. RESULTS: We devise novel statistical tests that show that indeed, rearrangement scenarios that transform the human into the mouse gene order are enriched for pairs of breakpoints that have frequent chromosome interactions. This is observed for both intra-chromosomal breakpoint pairs, as well as for inter-chromosomal pairs. For intra-chromosomal rearrangements, the enrichment exists from close (<20 Mb) to very distant (100 Mb) pairs. Further, the pattern exists across multiple cell lines in Hi-C data produced by different laboratories and at different stages of the cell cycle. We show that similarities in the contact frequencies between these many experiments contribute to the enrichment. We conclude that either (i) rearrangements usually involve breakpoints that are spatially close or (ii) there is selection against rearrangements that act on spatially distant breakpoints. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: Our pipeline is freely available at https://bitbucket.org/thekswenson/locality. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.008 |
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".