MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981578404 · doi:10.1139/y10-088

Regulation of stress-associated scaffold proteins JIP1 and JIP3 on the c-Jun NH<sub>2</sub>-terminal kinase in ischemia–reperfusion

2010· article· en· W1981578404 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Bing Xu, Yaling Zhou, O Karmin, Patrick C. Choy, Grant N. Pierce, Yaw L. Siow

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMelanoma and MAPK Pathways
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSt. Boniface HospitalAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
Keywordsc-junKinaseIschemiaChemistryScaffold proteinTerminal (telecommunication)MedicineCell biologyInternal medicineBiologyBiochemistrySignal transductionTranscription factorGeneComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ischemia-reperfusion (IR)-induced cell apoptosis involves the activation of c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase (JNK). The activation of JNK requires the presence of scaffold proteins called JNK-interacting proteins (JIP), which bind several members of a signaling cascade for proper signaling specificity. In this study, the expression of scaffold proteins JIP1 and JIP3 and their roles in the regulation of JNK activity were investigated in simulated IR in a cell model (H9c2). JIP1 protein expression was significantly decreased, whereas JIP3 protein expression was increased in IR H9c2 cells. Adenovirus-induced overexpression of JIP1 reduced IR-induced JNK activity and apoptosis. Conversely, overexpression of JIP3 increased JNK activity and apoptosis following IR. Depletion of endogenous JIP1 by siRNA treatment increased the IR-induced JNK activity, whereas siRNA-mediated depletion of endogenous JIP3 inhibited JNK activity. These results suggest that JIP1 and JIP3 play important roles in the activation of JNK during simulated IR challenge in H9c2 cells.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysFrench-language works237,207