Museum epigenomics: characterizing cytosine methylation in historic museum specimens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Museum genomics has transformed the field of collections-based research, opening up a range of new research directions for paleontological specimens as well as natural history specimens collected over the past few centuries. Recent work demonstrates that it is possible to characterize epigenetic markers such as DNA methylation in well preserved ancient tissues. This approach has not yet been tested in traditionally prepared natural history specimens such as dried bones and skins, the most common specimen types in vertebrate collections. In this study, we developed and tested methods to characterize cytosine methylation in dried skulls up to 76 years old. Using a combination of ddRAD and bisulphite treatment, we characterized patterns of cytosine methylation in two species of deer mouse (Peromyscus spp.) collected in the same region in Michigan in 1940, 2003, and 2013–2016. We successfully estimated methylation in specimens of all age groups, although older specimens yielded less data and showed greater interindividual variation in data yield than newer specimens. Global methylation estimates were reduced in the oldest specimens (76 years old) relative to the newest specimens (1–3 years old), which may reflect post-mortem hydrolytic deamination. Methylation was reduced in promoter regions relative to gene bodies and showed greater bimodality in autosomes relative to female X chromosomes, consistent with expectations for methylation in mammalian somatic cells. Our work demonstrates the utility of historic specimens for methylation analyses, as with genomic analyses; however, studies will need to accommodate the large variance in the quantity of data produced by older specimens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".