MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Conservation and divergence of canonical and non-canonical imprinting in murids

2024· other· en· W6939993352 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenomic imprintingImprinting (psychology)GeneDNA methylationGene expressionEpigeneticsGenomeRegulation of gene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Genomic imprinting affects gene expression in a parent-of-origin manner and has a profound impact on complex traits including growth and behavior. While the rat is widely used to model human pathophysiology, few imprinted genes have been identified in this murid. To systematically identify imprinted genes and genomic imprints in the rat, we use low input methods for genome-wide analyses of gene expression and DNA methylation to profile embryonic and extraembryonic tissues at allele-specific resolution. Results We identify 14 and 26 imprinted genes in these tissues, respectively, with 10 of these genes imprinted in both tissues. Comparative analyses with mouse reveal that orthologous imprinted gene expression and associated canonical DNA methylation imprints are conserved in the embryo proper of the Muridae family. However, only 3 paternally expressed imprinted genes are conserved in the extraembryonic tissue of murids, all of which are associated with non-canonical H3K27me3 imprints. The discovery of 8 novel non-canonical imprinted genes unique to the rat is consistent with more rapid evolution of extraembryonic imprinting. Meta-analysis of novel imprinted genes reveals multiple mechanisms by which species-specific imprinted expression may be established, including H3K27me3 deposition in the oocyte, the appearance of ZFP57 binding motifs, and the insertion of endogenous retroviral promoters. Conclusions In summary, we provide an expanded list of imprinted loci in the rat, reveal the extent of conservation of imprinted gene expression, and identify potential mechanisms responsible for the evolution of species-specific imprinting.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→