MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401534044 · doi:10.1093/hmg/ddae119

Testing the PEST hypothesis using relevant Rett mutations in MeCP2 E1 and E2 isoforms

2024· article· en· W4401534044 on OpenAlexaff
Ladan Kalani, Bo‐Hyun Kim, Alberto Ruiz de Chavez, Anastasia Roemer, Anna Mikhailov, Jonathan K. Merritt, Katrina Good, Robert L. Chow, Kerry R. Delaney, Michael J. Hendzel, Zhaolan Zhou, Jeffrey L. Neul, John B. Vincent, Juan Ausió

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Molecular Genetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentPerelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsMECP2BiologyGene isoformRett syndromeContext (archaeology)MutantGeneticsMutationHistoneCell biologyPhenotypeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutations in methyl-CpG binding protein 2 (MeCP2), such as the T158M, P152R, R294X, and R306C mutations, are responsible for most Rett syndrome (RTT) cases. These mutations often result in altered protein expression that appears to correlate with changes in the nuclear size; however, the molecular details of these observations are poorly understood. Using a C2C12 cellular system expressing human MeCP2-E1 isoform as well as mouse models expressing these mutations, we show that T158M and P152R result in a decrease in MeCP2 protein, whereas R306C has a milder variation, and R294X resulted in an overall 2.5 to 3 fold increase. We also explored the potential involvement of the MeCP2 PEST domains in the proteasome-mediated regulation of MeCP2. Finally, we used the R294X mutant to gain further insight into the controversial competition between MeCP2 and histone H1 in the chromatin context. Interestingly, in R294X, MeCP2 E1 and E2 isoforms were differently affected, where the E1 isoform contributes to much of the overall protein increase observed, while E2 decreases by half. The modes of MeCP2 regulation, thus, appear to be differently regulated in the two isoforms.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Molecular GeneticsSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207