MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035481403 · doi:10.1073/pnas.2007268117

The 3′ processing of antisense RNAs physically links to chromatin-based transcriptional control

2020· article· en· W3035481403 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xiaofeng Fang, Zhe Wu, Oleg Raitskin, Kimberly M. Webb, Philipp Voigt, Tian-Cong Lu, Martin Howard, Caroline Dean

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDirectorate for Biological SciencesEuropean CommissionInstitute of GeneticsWellcome Trust
KeywordsChromatinBiologyAntisense RNADemethylaseRNATranscription (linguistics)PolyadenylationRNA silencingCell biologyGene silencingRepressorNon-coding RNAGeneticsMolecular biologyTranscription factorRNA interferenceEpigeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significance RNA-mediated chromatin regulation is central to gene expression in many organisms. However, the mechanisms by which RNA influences the local chromatin environment are still poorly understood. Here, we show how RNA 3′ processing factors, which promote proximal polyadenylation of an Arabidopsis antisense transcript, physically associate with the chromatin modifiers FLD/LD/SDG26. The chromatin modifiers exist in a protein complex that inhibits H3K4me1 and H3K36me3 accumulation. By antagonizing transcription, the FLD/LD/SDG26-containing complex promotes H3K27me3 accumulation, reducing transcriptional initiation and elongation rates. This cotranscriptionally mediated chromatin silencing mechanism may be widely relevant for gene regulation in many organisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations70
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207