MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117462272

Importance of Cell Specific Transcription Factors in Sox2 Regulation, Conservation and Reprogramming

2016· dissertation· en· W3117462272 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nakisa Malek-Gilani

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReprogrammingSOX2Transcription factorBiologyCell biologyComputational biologyCellGeneticsGene
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance of Cell Specific Transcription Factors in Sox2 Regulation, Conservation and Reprogramming By Nakisa Malek-Gilani Master of Science, 2016 Cell and Systems Biology, University of Toronto The Sox2 gene is a transcription factor critical for the self-renewal and pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. While Sox2 is expressed in ES cells, the cell-type specific regulation of Sox2 transcription is only recently investigated; with a distal Sox2 Control Region (SCR) discovered. I demonstrated the importance of two clusters of ES cell specific transcription factor binding motifs in conferring enhancer activity to functional regions within the SCR. Mutation of a single motif results in significant loss of enhancer activity suggesting formation of TF complexes. Using these motifs studied in mice, I located a putative functionally conserved SCR region in human. The putative human Sox2 control region (hSCR) demonstrates high sequence conservation of ES cell specific TF motifs and two distinct clusters as seen in mouse. Overall, these results suggest TF binding at Sox2 distal enhancers is vital for activity and could be conserved across species.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207