14 research outputs found

    De novo and rare inherited mutations implicate the transcriptional coregulator TCF20/SPBP in autism spectrum disorder

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are common and have a strong genetic basis, yet the cause of ∼70-80% ASDs remains unknown. By clinical cytogenetic testing, we identified a family in which two brothers had ASD, mild intellectual disability and a chromosome 22 pericentric inversion, not detected in either parent, indicating de novo mutation with parental germinal mosaicism. We hypothesised that the rearrangement was causative of their ASD and localised the chromosome 22 breakpoints. METHODS: The rearrangement was characterised using fluorescence in situ hybridisation, Southern blotting, inverse PCR and dideoxy-sequencing. Open reading frames and intron/exon boundaries of the two physically disrupted genes identified, TCF20 and TNRC6B, were sequenced in 342 families (260 multiplex and 82 simplex) ascertained by the International Molecular Genetic Study of Autism Consortium (IMGSAC). RESULTS: IMGSAC family screening identified a de novo missense mutation of TCF20 in a single case and significant association of a different missense mutation of TCF20 with ASD in three further families. Through exome sequencing in another project, we independently identified a de novo frameshifting mutation of TCF20 in a woman with ASD and moderate intellectual disability. We did not identify a significant association of TNRC6B mutations with ASD. CONCLUSIONS: TCF20 encodes a transcriptional coregulator (also termed SPBP) that is structurally and functionally related to RAI1, the critical dosage-sensitive protein implicated in the behavioural phenotypes of the Smith-Magenis and Potocki-Lupski 17p11.2 deletion/duplication syndromes, in which ASD is frequently diagnosed. This study provides the first evidence that mutations in TCF20 are also associated with ASD

    Serious Play: Games in the Novels of Jane Austen

    No full text

    Developing responsible AI practices at the Smithsonian Institution

    No full text
    Applications of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have become pervasive in our everyday lives. These applications range from the mundane (asking ChatGPT to write a thank you note) to high-end science (predicting future weather patterns in the face of climate change), but because they rely on human-generated or mediated data, they also have the potential to perpetuate systemic oppression and racism. For museums and other cultural heritage institutions, there is great interest in automating the kinds of applications at which AI and ML can excel, e.g., tasks in computer vision including image segmentation, object recognition (labeling or identifying objects in an image), and natural language processing (e.g. named-entity recognition, topic modeling, generation of word and sentence embeddings) in order to make digital collections and archives discoverable, searchable, and appropriately tagged.A coalition of staff, fellows, and interns working in digital spaces at the Smithsonian Institution, who are either engaged with research using AI or ML tools, or working closely with digital data in other ways, came together to discuss the promise and potential peril of applying AI and ML at scale and this work results from those conversations. Here we present the process that has led to the development of an AI Values Statement and an implementation plan, including the release of datasets with accompanying documentation to enable these data to be used with improved context and reproducibility (dataset cards). We plan to continue releasing dataset cards, and for AI and ML applications, model cards, in order to enable informed usage of Smithsonian data and research products

    Developing responsible AI practices at the Smithsonian Institution

    No full text
    Applications of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have become pervasive in our everyday lives. These applications range from the mundane (asking ChatGPT to write a thank you note) to high-end science (predicting future weather patterns in the face of climate change), but, because they rely on human-generated or mediated data, they also have the potential to perpetuate systemic oppression and racism. For museums and other cultural heritage institutions, there is great interest in automating the kinds of applications at which AI and ML can excel, for example, tasks in computer vision including image segmentation, object recognition (labelling or identifying objects in an image) and natural language processing (e.g. named-entity recognition, topic modelling, generation of word and sentence embeddings) in order to make digital collections and archives discoverable, searchable and appropriately tagged.A coalition of staff, Fellows and interns working in digital spaces at the Smithsonian Institution, who are either engaged with research using AI or ML tools or working closely with digital data in other ways, came together to discuss the promise and potential perils of applying AI and ML at scale and this work results from those conversations. Here, we present the process that has led to the development of an AI Values Statement and an implementation plan, including the release of datasets with accompanying documentation to enable these data to be used with improved context and reproducibility (dataset cards). We plan to continue releasing dataset cards and for AI and ML applications, model cards, in order to enable informed usage of Smithsonian data and research products

    De novo and rare inherited mutations implicate the transcriptional coregulator TCF20/SPBP in autism spectrum disorder.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are common and have a strong genetic basis, yet the cause of ∼70–80% ASDs remains unknown. By clinical cytogenetic testing, we identified a family in which two brothers had ASD, mild intellectual disability and a chromosome 22 pericentric inversion, not detected in either parent, indicating de novo mutation with parental germinal mosaicism. We hypothesised that the rearrangement was causative of their ASD and localised the chromosome 22 breakpoints. METHODS: The rearrangement was characterised using fluorescence in situ hybridisation, Southern blotting, inverse PCR and dideoxy-sequencing. Open reading frames and intron/exon boundaries of the two physically disrupted genes identified, TCF20 and TNRC6B, were sequenced in 342 families (260 multiplex and 82 simplex) ascertained by the International Molecular Genetic Study of Autism Consortium (IMGSAC). RESULTS: IMGSAC family screening identified a de novo missense mutation of TCF20 in a single case and significant association of a different missense mutation of TCF20 with ASD in three further families. Through exome sequencing in another project, we independently identified a de novo frameshifting mutation of TCF20 in a woman with ASD and moderate intellectual disability. We did not identify a significant association of TNRC6B mutations with ASD. CONCLUSIONS: TCF20 encodes a transcriptional coregulator (also termed SPBP) that is structurally and functionally related to RAI1, the critical dosage-sensitive protein implicated in the behavioural phenotypes of the Smith–Magenis and Potocki–Lupski 17p11.2 deletion/duplication syndromes, in which ASD is frequently diagnosed. This study provides the first evidence that mutations in TCF20 are also associated with ASD
    corecore