MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028527300 · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16317-2

HOX13-dependent chromatin accessibility underlies the transition towards the digit development program

2020· article· en· W3028527300 on OpenAlexafffund
Inès Desanlis, Yacine Kherdjemil, Alexandre Mayran, Yasser Bouklouch, Claudia Gentile, Rushikesh Sheth, Rolf Zeller, Jacques Drouin, Marie Kmita

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMontreal Clinical Research Institute
FundersCIHR Skin Research Training CentreCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de MontréalGovernment of CanadaÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de LausanneCompute Canada
KeywordsHox geneChromatinLimb developmentEctopic expressionBiologyTranscription factorHomeoboxChIA-PETHomeotic geneEvolutionary biologyGeneticsComputational biologyContext (archaeology)GeneChromatin remodeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hox genes encode transcription factors (TFs) that establish morphological diversity in the developing embryo. The similar DNA-binding motifs of the various HOX TFs contrast with the wide-range of HOX-dependent genetic programs. The influence of the chromatin context on HOX binding specificity remains elusive. Here, we used the developing limb as a model system to compare the binding specificity of HOXA13 and HOXD13 (HOX13 hereafter), which are required for digit formation, and HOXA11, involved in forearm/leg development. We find that upon ectopic expression in distal limb buds, HOXA11 binds sites normally HOX13-specific. Importantly, these sites are loci whose chromatin accessibility relies on HOX13. Moreover, we show that chromatin accessibility specific to the distal limb requires HOX13 function. Based on these results, we propose that HOX13 TFs pioneer the distal limb-specific chromatin accessibility landscape for the proper implementation of the distal limb developmental program.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations55
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207