eQTL mapping identifies insertion- and deletion-specific eQTLs in multiple tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genome-wide gene expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) mapping have been focused on single-nucleotide polymorphisms and have helped interpret findings from diseases mapping studies. The functional effect of structure variants, especially short insertions and deletions (indel) has not been well investigated. Here we impute 1,380,133 indels based on the latest 1,000 Genomes Project panel into three eQTL data sets from multiple tissues. Imputation of indels increased 9.9% power and identifies indel-specific eQTLs for 325 genes. We find introns and vicinities of UTRs are more enriched of indel eQTLs and 3.6 (single-tissue)–9.2%(multi-tissue) of previous identified eSNPs were taggers of eindels. Functional analyses identifies epigenetics marks, gene ontology categories and disease GWAS loci affected by SNPs and indels eQTLs showing tissue-consistent or tissue-specific effects. This study provides new insights into the underlying genetic architecture of gene expression across tissues and new resource to interpret function of diseases and traits associated structure variants. Expression quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) may provide insight into the functional mechanisms underlying disease risk variants. Here the authors characterize INDEL-specific eQTLs in several tissues and show that these can have both tissue-specific and tissue-consistent effects.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".