MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W129401182 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.21.6.a1413-b

Expression of the tail‐anchored protein SLMAP in developing myocardium and during remodelling after myocardial infarction

2007· article· en· W129401182 on OpenAlexaff
Moni Nader, Bart Westendorp, Frans H. H. Leenen, Balwant S. Tuana

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVentricleMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineCardiologyImmunostainingLigationVentricular remodelingWestern blotMedicineChemistryImmunohistochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Organization of Excitation-Contraction (E-C) coupling mechanism is temporally regulated during heart remodelling. The molecular components involved in organizing membranes junctions with respect to the contractile apparatus remain elusive. SLMAP (Sarcolemmal Membrane Associated Protein) is a unique molecule shown to localize in cardiac membranes as well as the contractile apparatus and may serve to organizing the E-C coupling mechanism. The aim of this study was to investigate SLMAP expression and localization in developing myocardium and after Myocardial Infarction (MI) to correlate changes with any reorganization of the E-C coupling mechanism. SLMAP was located at the Z-disc, T-tubules and Sarcolemmal Membranes of rat myocardium as assessed by Immunostaining and Western blot analysis. SLMAP expression was significantly increased (p<0.005) from embryonic (E) day 16 to postnatal (P1) and gradually decreased (p<0.01) to low levels at 13 weeks. In a rat heart MI model induced by coronary ligation, SLMAP1 levels significantly increased (4 weeks post-surgery) in Infarct tissue vs. remote left ventricle (LV) (p<0.05) and SHAM (p<0.005). The location of SLMAP and temporal changes in its expression in normal and defective myocardium suggest that SLMAP may serve a role in organizing the E-C coupling apparatus during normal cardiac growth and in remodelling post MI. This work was supported by a grant from HSFO.

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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→