Endonuclear lipids in liver cellsThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled The Nucleus: A Cell Within A Cell.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lipids are not only components of cell nucleus membranes, but are also found in the membrane-depleted nuclei where they fulfill special functions. We have investigated the lipid composition of membrane-depleted rat liver nuclei obtained by incubation with low Triton X-100 concentrations of 0.04% and 0.08%, which rendered them unaltered or hardly altered. Under these conditions, 26% of proteins and 22% of phospholipids were recovered. The main phospholipids were phosphatidylcholine > phosphatidylethanolamine > phosphatidylinositol = or > phosphatidylserine and sphingomyelin (in decreasing concentrations). The fatty acid components of total lipids and phosphatidylcholine were mainly unsaturated. Over 40% belonged to the n-6 series (arachidonic > or = 25% and linoleic 15%); approximately 40% corresponded to saturated acids and <10% were monoenoic. Endonuclear phosphatidylcholine was built up by 16 molecular species, the most abundant being 18:0-20:4 (32%), 16:0-20:4 (19%), 16:0-18:2 (13%), and 18:0-18:2 (11%). The fatty acid composition and phosphatidylcholine molecular species distribution in the membrane-depleted nucleus of rat liver showed patterns similar to the whole nucleus, mitochondria, microsomes, and homogenate of the parent liver cells, suggesting that endonuclear lipid pool composition is mainly determined by a liver organ profile.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".