Condensed chromatin behaves like a solid on the mesoscale in vitro and in living cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY The association of nuclear DNA with histones to form chromatin is essential to the temporal and spatial control of eukaryotic genomes. In this study, we examined the physical state of chromatin in vitro and in vivo. Our in vitro studies demonstrate that MgCl2-dependent self-association of native chromatin fragments or reconstituted nucleosomal arrays produced supramolecular condensates whose constituents are physically constrained and solid-like. Liquid chromatin condensates could be generated in vitro, but only using non-physiological conditions. By measuring DNA mobility within heterochromatin and euchromatin in living cells, we show that chromatin also exhibits solid-like behavior in vivo. Representative heterochromatin proteins, however, displayed liquid-like behavior and coalesced around a solid chromatin scaffold. Remarkably, both euchromatin and heterochromatin showed solid-like behavior even when transmission electron microscopy revealed limited interactions between chromatin fibers. Our results therefore argue that chromatin is not liquid but exists in a solid-like material state whose properties are tuned by fiber-fiber interactions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".