Evidence for cross-talk between stanniocalcins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are 2 forms of stanniocalcin (STC) produced by the STC-1 gene; a 50 kDa polypeptide known as STC50 and a recently discovered group of higher molecular weight variants that are collectively referred to as big STC. Both have different tissue patterns of expression and different intracellular targeting pathways. STC50 functions locally in tissues such as muscle, liver, and kidney and is targeted to mitochondria. Big STC, on the other hand, is made by the ovaries. It signals both locally on nearby corpus luteal cells and systemically. Interestingly, however, receptor binding assays employing STC50 as the tracer have shown that the smaller ligand can bind equally to tissue receptors targeted by either form of the hormone. This suggests there may be cross-talk between ligands. The present study provides credence to this notion by demonstrating how the 2 hormones can compete for tissue receptors normally targeted by 1 form of the hormone (big STC). The results also reveal how STC50 can completely block the inhibitory effects of big STC on luteal cell progesterone release when added simultaneously. The findings therefore add credence to the possibility that there may be circumstances during which the 2 ligands functionally antagonize each other's actions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".