MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974025170 · doi:10.1038/icb.2010.147

DARC and D6: silent partners in chemokine regulation?

2010· review· en· W1974025170 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunology and Cell Biology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemokine receptors and signaling
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersDrug Applied Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical SciencesBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilVersus ArthritisWellcome Trust
KeywordsChemokineChemokine receptorBiologyChemotaxisCCR1SilenceCell biologyComputational biologyReceptorNeuroscienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemokine receptors adorn the surface of leukocytes and other cell types ready to translate the extracellular chemokine environment into functional cellular outcomes. However, there are several molecules that, in many respects, look like chemokine receptors, but which do not have the ability to confer chemotactic potential to cell lines. This apparent silence spurred the search for signalling-independent functions and led to the development of new paradigms of chemokine regulation. In this review, we summarise the experimental basis for these ideas focussing on DARC and D6, the most studied members of this group of molecules. We discuss data generated using in vitro systems and genetically deficient mice, include results from observational human studies, and summarise the key findings of recent research. We take a critical look at current models of in vivo function highlighting important gaps in our knowledge and demonstrating that there is still much to find out about these enigmatic molecules.

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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.307 · 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