MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981053362 · doi:10.1038/icb.2010.95

Expression of chemokine decoy receptors and their ligands at the porcine maternal–fetal interface

2010· article· en· W1981053362 on OpenAlexafffund
Jocelyn M. Wessels, Nicola F. Linton, M.J. van den Heuvel, Sonya A Cnossen, Andrew K. Edwards, B. Anne Croy, Chandrakant Tayade

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunology and Cell Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemokine receptors and signaling
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDecoyCCR1ChemokineChemokine receptorCXCL2BiologyReceptorCCL7CCL21CCL19CC chemokine receptorsImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Successful pregnancy requires coordinated maternal-fetal cross-talk to establish vascular connections that support conceptus growth. In pigs, two waves of spontaneous fetal loss occur and 30-40% of conceptuses are lost before parturition. Previous studies associated these losses with decreased angiogenic and increased inflammatory cytokines. Chemokines, a sub-category of cytokines, and decoy receptors control leukocyte trafficking, angiogenesis and development. The availability of chemokines is regulated by three non-signalling decoy receptors: chemokine decoy receptor (D6), Duffy antigen receptor for chemokines (DARC) and Chemocentryx decoy receptor (CCX CKR). We hypothesized that the expression of these receptors and their chemokine ligands regulate the porcine pregnancy success or failure. Here, we describe for the first time the transcription and translation of all three decoy receptors and several chemokine ligands in endometrium and trophoblast associated with healthy and arresting conceptuses at gestation day (gd) 20 and gd50. Among decoy receptors, transcripts for DARC were significantly reduced in endometrium, whereas that for CCX CKR were significantly increased in endometrium and trophoblast at gd50 arresting compared with healthy sites. However, western blot analysis revealed no differences in decoy receptor expression between healthy and arresting tissues. Transcripts for decoy receptor ligands CCL2, CCL3, CCL4, CCL5, CCL11, CCL19, CCL21, CXCL2 and CXCL8 were stable between healthy and arresting littermates. Quantification by SearchLight chemiluminescent protein array confirmed ligand expression at the protein level. These data indicate that decoy receptors and ligands are expressed at the porcine maternal-fetal interface and dysregulation of decoy receptor (DARC and CCX CKR) transcripts occurs at sites of fetal arrest.

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations35
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunology and Cell BiologySame topicChemokine receptors and signalingFrench-language works237,207