ENDOTHELIAL GENE REGULATORY ELEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH CARDIOPHARYNGEAL LINEAGE DIFFERENTIATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Endothelial cells (EC) differentiate from multiple sources, including the cardiopharyngeal mesoderm, which gives rise also to cardiac and branchiomeric muscles. Here, we used a cardiogenic mesoderm cell differentiation model that also activates an endothelial transcription program to identify endothelial regulatory elements activated in early cardiogenic mesoderm. Integrating our chromatin remodeling and gene expression data with available single-cell RNA-seq data from mouse embryos, we identified 101 putative regulatory elements of EC genes. We then applied a machine-learning strategy, trained on validated enhancers, to predict the probability of the sequences to function as enhancers. The computational assay determined that 50% of these sequences were likely enhancers, some of which have been previously reported. We also identified a smaller set of regulatory elements of well-known EC genes and validated them using genetic and epigenetic perturbation. Finally, we used the integration of multiple data sources and computational tools to search for transcriptional factor binding motifs. In conclusion, we identified novel EC regulatory sequences with a high likelihood to be enhancers, and we validated a subset of them using computational and cell culture models. Motif analyses revealed that the core EC transcription factors GATA/ETS/FOS is a likely driver of EC differentiation in cardiopharyngeal mesoderm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".