MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387768772 · doi:10.1101/2023.10.17.562732

Population variability in X-chromosome inactivation across 9 mammalian species

2023· preprint· en· W4387768772 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan M. Werner, John Hover, Jesse Gillis

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal Abnormalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsX-inactivationBiologyEpigeneticsAlleleGeneticsPopulationGenetic variabilityX chromosomeEvolutionary biologyChromosomeGeneGenotypeDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the two X chromosomes in female mammals is epigenetically silenced in embryonic stem cells by X chromosome inactivation (XCI). This creates a mosaic of cells expressing either the maternal or the paternal X allele. The XCI ratio, the proportion of inactivated parental alleles, varies widely among individuals, representing the largest instance of epigenetic variability within mammalian populations. While various contributing factors to XCI variability are recognized, namely stochastic and/or genetic effects, their relative contributions are poorly understood. This is due in part to limited cross-species analysis, making it difficult to distinguish between generalizable or species-specific mechanisms for XCI ratio variability. To address this gap, we measured XCI ratios in nine mammalian species (9,143 individual samples), ranging from rodents to primates, and compared the strength of stochastic models or genetic factors for explaining XCI variability. Our results demonstrate the embryonic stochasticity of XCI is a general explanatory model for population XCI variability in mammals, while genetic factors play a minor role.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal Abnormalities→French-language works237,207→