MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975028084 · doi:10.1262/jrd.2014-139

The fatty acid binding protein 6 gene (<i>Fabp6</i>) is expressed in murine granulosa cells and is involved in ovulatory response to superstimulation

2015· article· en· W1975028084 on OpenAlexafffund
Raj Duggavathi, Dayananda Siddappa, Yasmin Schuermann, Melissa Pansera, Isabelle Ménard, Dana Praslickova, Luis B. Agellon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reproduction and Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInternal medicineEndocrinologyOvaryOvulationBiologyLuteal phaseFatty acid-binding proteinGene expressionAntral follicleGeneFollicular phaseMedicineBiochemistryHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fatty acid binding protein 6 (Fabp6) is commonly regarded as a bile acid binding protein found in the distal portion of the small intestine and has been shown to be important in maintaining bile acid homeostasis. Previous studies have also reported the presence of Fabp6 in human, rat and fish ovaries, but the significance of Fabp6 in this organ is largely unknown. Therefore, we surveyed murine ovaries for Fabp6 gene expression and evaluated its role in ovarian function using mice with whole body Fabp6 deficiency. Here we show that the Fabp6 gene is expressed in granulosa and luteal cells of the mouse ovary. Treatment with gonadotropins stimulated Fabp6 gene expression in large antral follicles. The ovulation rate in response to superovulatory treatment in Fabp6-deficient mice was markedly decreased compared to wildtype (C57BL/6) mice. The results of this study suggest that expression of Fabp6 gene in granulosa cells serves an important and previously unrecognized function in fertility.

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)0.003
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reproduction and DevelopmentSame topicDrug Transport and Resistance MechanismsFrench-language works237,207