MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120252417 · doi:10.1002/bies.202000281

MeCP2: latest insights fundamentally change our understanding of its interactions with chromatin and its functional attributes

2021· review· en· W3120252417 on OpenAlexafffund
John B. Vincent, Juan Ausió

Bibliographic record

VenueBioEssays · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChromatinComputational biologyBiologyNeuroscienceEvolutionary biologyCognitive scienceGeneticsPsychologyDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methyl CpG binding protein 2 (MeCP2) was initially isolated as an exclusive reader of DNA methylated at CpG. This recognition site, was subsequently extended to other DNA methylated residues and it has been the persisting dogma that binding to methylated DNA constitutes its physiologically relevant role. As we review here, two very recent papers fundamentally change our understanding of the interactions of this protein with chromatin, as well as its functional attributes. In the first one, the protein has been shown to bind to tri-methylated histone H3 (H3K27me3), providing a hint for what might turn out to be the first described chromodomain-containing protein reader in the animal kingdom, and unequivocally demonstrates the ability of MeCP2 to bind to nonmethylated CpG regions of the genome. The second paper reports how the protein dynamically participates in the formation of constitutive heterochromatin condensates. Histone H3K27me3 is a critical component of this form of chromatin.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioEssaysSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207