MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Wild-Type Huntingtin Protects from Apoptosis Upstream of Caspase-3

2000· article· en· W1820767944 on OpenAlexaff
Dorotea Rigamonti, Johannes H. Bauer, Claudio De‐Fraja, Luciano Conti, Simonetta Sipione, Clara Sciorati, Emilio Clementi, Abigail S. Hackam, Michael R. Hayden, Yong Li, Jillian K. Cooper, Christopher A. Ross, Stefano Govoni, Claudius Vincenz, Elena Cattaneo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeHereditary Disease FoundationNational Institutes of HealthConsiglio Nazionale delle RicercheStrongU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsHuntingtinBiologyCell biologyMutantHuntingtin ProteinWild typeApoptosisProgrammed cell deathCaspaseHuntington's diseaseMutationMolecular biologyGeneticsGeneDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expansion of a polyglutamine sequence in the N terminus of huntingtin is the gain-of-function event that causes Huntington's disease. This mutation affects primarily the medium-size spiny neurons of the striatum. Huntingtin is expressed in many neuronal and non-neuronal cell types, implying a more general function for the wild-type protein. Here we report that wild-type huntingtin acts by protecting CNS cells from a variety of apoptotic stimuli, including serum withdrawal, death receptors, and pro-apoptotic Bcl-2 homologs. This protection may take place at the level of caspase-9 activation. The full-length protein also modulates the toxicity of the poly-Q expansion. Cells expressing full-length mutant protein are susceptible to fewer death stimuli than cells expressing truncated mutant huntingtin.

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations395
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207