MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1614456110 · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.176.1.441

Interaction of Mouse Dendritic Cells and Malaria-Infected Erythrocytes: Uptake, Maturation, and Antigen Presentation

2006· article· en· W1614456110 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca Ing, Mariela Segura, Neeta Thawani, Mifong Tam, Mary M. Stevenson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Immunology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
KeywordsBiologyCell biologyCD11cColocalizationDendritic cellImmunologyImmune systemPhenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Consistent with their seminal role in detecting infection, both mouse bone marrow-derived and splenic CD11c+ dendritic cells (DCs) exhibited higher levels of uptake of Plasmodium chabaudi-parasitized RBCs (pRBCs) than of noninfected RBCs (nRBCs) as determined by our newly developed flow cytometric technique using the dye CFSE to label RBCs before coculture with DCs. To confirm that expression of CFSE by CD11c+ cells following coculture with CFSE-labeled pRBCs represents internalization of pRBC by DCs, we showed colocalization of CFSE-labeled pRBCs and PE-labeled CD11c+ DCs by confocal fluorescence microscopy. Treatment of DCs with cytochalasin D significantly inhibited the uptake of pRBCs, demonstrating that uptake is an actin-dependent phagocytic process. The uptake of pRBCs by splenic CD11c+ DCs was significantly enhanced after infection in vivo and was associated with the induction of DC maturation, IL-12 production, and stimulation of CD4+ T cell proliferation and IFN-gamma production. These results suggest that DCs selectively phagocytose pRBCs and present pRBC-derived Ags to CD4+ T cells, thereby promoting development of protective Th1-dependent immune responses to blood-stage malaria infection.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
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 teacher head, 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

Citations128
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of ImmunologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207