MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091035804 · doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2020.09.002

Combinatorial Action of Temporally Segregated Transcription Factors

2020· article· en· W3091035804 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Julien Charest, Thomas Daniele, Jingkui Wang, Aleksandr Bykov, Ariane Mandlbauer, Mila Asparuhova, Paula Gutiérrez‐Pérez, Luisa Cochella

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Cell · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Research CouncilFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNational Institutes of HealthAustrian Science FundBoehringer Ingelheim
KeywordsBiologyTranscription factorTranscription (linguistics)Action (physics)Computational biologyGeneticsCell biologyEvolutionary biologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combinatorial action of transcription factors (TFs) with partially overlapping expression is a widespread strategy to generate novel gene-expression patterns and, thus, cellular diversity. Known mechanisms underlying combinatorial activity require co-expression of TFs within the same cell. Here, we describe the mechanism by which two TFs that are never co-expressed generate a new, intersectional expression pattern in C. elegans embryos: lineage-specific priming of a gene by a transiently expressed TF generates a unique intersection with a second TF acting on the same gene four cell divisions later; the second TF is expressed in multiple cells but only activates transcription in those where priming occurred. Early induction of active transcription is necessary and sufficient to establish a competent state, maintained by broadly expressed regulators in the absence of the initial trigger. We uncover additional cells diversified through this mechanism. Our findings define a mechanism for combinatorial TF activity with important implications for generation of cell-type diversity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations46
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental CellSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207