Simultaneous assessment of mitochondrial DNA copy number and nuclear epigenetic age towards predictive models of development and aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Mitochondrial dysfunction and nuclear epigenetic alterations, two hallmarks of aging, are associated with aberrant development and complex disease risk. Here, we report a method for the simultaneous assessment of mitochondrial DNA copy number (mtDNA-CN) and DNA methylation age (DNAm age) from the same DNA extraction using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) and array data, respectively. RESULT: We present methods for the concurrent estimation of mtDNA-CN and DNAm age from the same DNA samples. This includes qPCR to estimate mtDNA-CN, representing the number of circular mitochondrial genomes in a cell, and DNA methylation microarray data to estimate the epigenetic age of an individual. Further, we provide a method for the combination of these metrics into a shared metric termed 'mtEpiAge'. This approach provides a valuable tool for exploring the interplay between mitochondrial dysfunction and nuclear epigenetic alterations, and their associations with disease and aging.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".