MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The role of maternal factors in epigenetic programming of neurodevelopment

2022· article· en· W4225399183 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick O. McGowan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEpigeneticsNeuroscienceBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early life events are potent determinants of vulnerability and resistance to stressors. In many species, including rodents, the mother is the primary mediator of behavioral and physiological responses to stress in offspring during development. Emerging evidence indicates that epigenetic modifications in the brain of developing offspring are associated with the effects of maternal stress as well as individual neural, physiological, and behavioral responses to adversity. I will discuss research in my lab focused on identifying the relevant genomic targets (in the brain and periphery) of maternal stressors that exert long‐term ‘programming’ effects on stress responses. We have approached this question in several ways. First, we have studied ecologically important stressors applied during gestation. Second, we have investigated factors that co‐occur or interact with maternal care, including variations in ambient temperature and offspring genotype, that influence neurodevelopment and later‐life behavior. Third, we have explored direct exposure to maternal dietary stressors across the developmental period on offspring phenotype and genome‐wide epigenetic modifications in offspring brain. Through these investigations we will explore the significance of the maternal environment in neurodevelopment and the role of epigenetic mechanisms in important signaling pathways involved in susceptibility to stress‐related illness.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→