Characterizing the landscape of gene expression variance in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gene expression variance has been linked to organismal function and fitness but remains a commonly neglected aspect of molecular research. As a result, we lack a comprehensive understanding of the patterns of transcriptional variance across genes, and how this variance is linked to context-specific gene regulation and gene function. Here, we use 57 large publicly available RNA-seq data sets to investigate the landscape of gene expression variance. These studies cover a wide range of tissues and allowed us to assess if there are consistently more or less variable genes across tissues and data sets and what mechanisms drive these patterns. We show that gene expression variance is broadly similar across tissues and studies, indicating that the pattern of transcriptional variance is consistent. We use this similarity to create both global and within-tissue rankings of variation, which we use to show that function, sequence variation, and gene regulatory signatures contribute to gene expression variance. Low-variance genes are associated with fundamental cell processes and have lower levels of genetic polymorphisms, have higher gene-gene connectivity, and tend to be associated with chromatin states associated with transcription. In contrast, high-variance genes are enriched for genes involved in immune response, environmentally responsive genes, immediate early genes, and are associated with higher levels of polymorphisms. These results show that the pattern of transcriptional variance is not noise. Instead, it is a consistent gene trait that seems to be functionally constrained in human populations. Furthermore, this commonly neglected aspect of molecular phenotypic variation harbors important information to understand complex traits and disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".