MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interaction of human and mouse Aβ peptides

2004· article· en· W1521650361 on OpenAlexafffund
Justin Fung, David Frost, Avijit Chakrabartty, JoAnne McLaurin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurochemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlzheimer Society
KeywordsGenetically modified mouseTransgeneSolubilityMutantChemistryAmyloid precursor proteinNeurodegenerationAmyloid (mycology)FluorescenceAlzheimer's diseaseProtein aggregationFluorescence microscopeCell biologyBiochemistryMolecular biologyBiophysicsBiologyDiseasePathologyMedicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transgenic mice over-expressing mutant human amyloid precursor protein have become an important tool for research on Alzheimer's disease (AD) and, in particular, for therapeutic screening. Many models have reported formation of amyloid plaques with age as is detected in AD. However, the plaques generated in transgenic mice are more soluble than human plaques. Differences in solubility may occur for a number of reasons; one proposal is the presence of murine Abeta peptides within the CNS milieu. Here, we report the interaction of human and murine Abeta peptides, Abeta40 and Abeta42, utilizing a fluorescence assay to monitor formation of mixed pre-fibrillar aggregates, electron microscopy to examine morphological characteristics and detergent solubility to monitor stability. Our results demonstrate that interspecies Abeta aggregates and fibres are readily formed and are more stable than homogenous human fibres. Furthermore, these results suggest that the presence of endogenous murine Abeta in human APP transgenic mice does not account for the increased solubility of plaques.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations57
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurochemistrySame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207