MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378438093 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2023.112567

True-to-scale DNA-density maps correlate with major accessibility differences between active and inactive chromatin

2023· article· en· W4378438093 on OpenAlexafffund
Márton Gelléri, Shih‐Ya Chen, Barbara Hübner, J Neumann, Ole Kröger, Filip Sadlo, Jorg Imhoff, Michael J. Hendzel, Marion Cremer, Thomas Cremer, Hilmar Strickfaden, Christoph Cremer

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Chromatin Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChromatinMacromoleculeDNAFluorescence microscopeMicroscopyBiophysicsCell biologyCell nucleusBiologyNuclear poreElectron microscopeFluorescenceResolution (logic)Molecular biologyChemistryCytoplasmBiochemistryPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chromatin compaction differences may have a strong impact on accessibility of individual macromolecules and macromolecular assemblies to their DNA target sites. Estimates based on fluorescence microscopy with conventional resolution, however, suggest only modest compaction differences (∼2–10×) between the active nuclear compartment (ANC) and inactive nuclear compartment (INC). Here, we present maps of nuclear landscapes with true-to-scale DNA densities, ranging from <5 to >300 Mbp/μm 3 . Maps are generated from individual human and mouse cell nuclei with single-molecule localization microscopy at ∼20 nm lateral and ∼100 nm axial optical resolution and are supplemented by electron spectroscopic imaging. Microinjection of fluorescent nanobeads with sizes corresponding to macromolecular assemblies for transcription into nuclei of living cells demonstrates their localization and movements within the ANC and exclusion from the INC.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsFrench-language works237,207