MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414487696 · doi:10.3390/jdb13040034

Exploring the Regulation of Tmem182 Gene Expression in the Context of Retinoid X Receptor Signaling

2025· article· en· W4414487696 on OpenAlexafffund
Saadia Khilji, Munerah Hamed, Jihong Chen, Qiao Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developmental Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUmm Al-Qura University
KeywordsMyoDRetinoid X receptorMyogenesisMyogenic regulatory factorsRegulation of gene expressionRetinoid X receptor alphaHistoneHistone acetyltransferaseGene expressionEpigenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have previously established that bexarotene, a clinically approved agonist of retinoid X receptor (RXR), promotes the differentiation and fusion of skeletal myoblasts. We have also analyzed the genomic programs underlying rexinoid-enhanced myogenic differentiation to identify novel regulatory pathways. As such, we observed a significant upregulation of a transcript encoding a predicted transmembrane protein, Tmem182, during C2C12 myoblast differentiation. Despite the documentation of Tmem182 expression in skeletal muscles, its regulation had yet to be explored. Here, we show that Tmem182 gene expression is markedly augmented in early myoblast differentiation and further enhanced by RXR signaling. In addition, Tmem182 expression is specific to muscle tissues and related to muscle master regulator MyoD. We found that MyoD and histone acetyltransferase p300 are bound to the Tmem182 promoter, and Tmem182 expression is p300-dependent. Thus, our data display a putative epigenetic signature associated with p300 and histone acetylation in rexinoid-responsive locus activation and transcription of myogenic targets.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Developmental BiologySame topicRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processesFrench-language works237,207