MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386474232 · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adi2050

Establishment of paternal methylation imprint at the<i>H19/Igf2</i>imprinting control region

2023· article· en· W4386474232 on OpenAlexaff
Ji Liao, Sangmin Song, Samuel Gusscott, Zhen Fu, Ivan VanderKolk, Brianna M. Busscher, Kin H. Lau, Julie Brind’Amour, Piroska E. Szabó

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Advances · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesÖsterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften
KeywordsCTCFImprinting (psychology)Genomic imprintingGermlineBiologyAlleleDNA methylationGeneticsMethylationEpigeneticsTranscription factorEnhancerGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The insulator model explains the workings of the H19 and Igf2 imprinted domain in the soma, where insulation of the Igf2 promoter from its enhancers occurs by CTCF in the maternally inherited unmethylated chromosome but not the paternally inherited methylated allele. The molecular mechanism that targets paternal methylation imprint establishment to the imprinting control region (ICR) in the male germline is unknown. We tested the function of prospermatogonia-specific broad low-level transcription in this process using mouse genetics. Paternal imprint establishment was abnormal when transcription was stopped at the entry point to the ICR. The germline epimutation persisted into the paternal allele of the soma, resulting in reduced Igf2 in fetal organs and reduced fetal growth, consistent with the insulator model and insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF2)’s role as fetal growth factor. These results collectively support the role of broad low-level transcription through the H19/Igf2 ICR in the establishment of its paternal methylation imprint in the male germ line, with implications for Silver-Russell syndrome.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience AdvancesSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207