Bibliographic record
Abstract
The kidney is a major site of pathologic complications in diabetes mellitus including those affecting the basement membrane. Although several hypotheses of the etiology of renal diabetic microangiopathy involve effects of insulin on basement membrane metabolism, little is known about the localization or properties of insulin receptors in isolated renal glomeruli. We have incubated isolated glomeruli and tubules with 125I-insulin and examined the binding of the hormone to these purified renal subfractions. Glomeruli and tubules exhibited specific binding of 125I-insulin at 22 °C which increased with time and protein concentration. Nonspecific binding accounted for 20–35% of the total binding observed. At a concentration of 1 ng/ml 125I-insulin specific binding reached a plateau within 60–90 min at 22 °C. Unlabeled insulin competitively displaced 125I-insulin from its binding sites with 2.8 × 10-9 Minsulin inhibiting half of the initial binding to glomeruli while a 10-fold higher concentration of unlabeled insulin was required to achieve a similar inhibition of tubular binding. Insulin analogues were less potent than insulin itself in inhibiting the binding of 125I-insulin to both glomeruli and tubules in the order of relative potency: insulin > despentapeptide insulin > proinsulin indicating the specificity of the binding. Scatchard analysis of the competition binding data of 125I-insulin to glomeruli and tubules was consistent with two distinct binding sites and/or negative cooperativity between one class of receptor sites. The binding of 125I-insulin to the glomerular receptor(s) exhibited a higher affinity than that to the tubular receptor(s) which had a greater binding capacity. These two subunits of the nephron, therefore, contain insulin receptors with different binding properties which may serve different functions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.012 |
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".