Antagonistic histone H2A variants and autonomous heterochromatin formation shape epigenomic patterns in Arabidopsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Heterochromatin formation is pivotal in many eukaryotes with repetitive sequences, such as transposable elements (TEs). However, in plants, where the known de novo DNA methylation mechanism (RdDM) targets euchromatin, how heterochromatin is formed in a region-specific manner remains unclear. We previously reported an RdDM-independent de novo establishment of H3K9me and non-CpG methylation, both of which localize in heterochromatin. Here we show that the mutually exclusive histone H2A variants, H2A.W and H2A.Z, function as guides to initiate heterochromatin formation; H2A.W and H2A.Z promotes and inhibits heterochromatin establishment, respectively, especially in chromosomal arm regions with dispersed TEs. In contrast, pericentromeric TEs demonstrate autonomous heterochromatin formation, less dependently on these H2A variants. Furthermore, H2A.Z protects protein-coding genes from ectopic heterochromatin formation, possibly by preventing its spreading. We propose that the genome indexing mechanism driven by H2A variants, as well as the autonomous formation of pericentromeric heterochromatin, shapes proper epigenomic patterns in Arabidopsis.
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) | 0.001 | 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".