MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985762761 · doi:10.4161/cam.22198

Separation of distinct adhesion complexes and associated cytoskeleton by a micro-stencil-printing method

2012· article· en· W1985762761 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

VenueCell Adhesion & Migration · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCellular Mechanics and Interactions
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueConseil National de la Recherche ScientifiqueAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsHemidesmosomeStencilExtracellular matrixFocal adhesionFibronectinAdhesionMicrocontact printingActinCytoskeletonCell adhesionMaterials scienceLamininNanotechnologyCell biologyBiophysicsChemistryBiologyCellComputer scienceBiochemistryBasement membraneSignal transduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adhesion between cells and the extracellular matrix is mediated by different types of transmembraneous proteins. Their associations to specific partners lead to the assembly of contacts such as focal adhesions and hemidesmosomes. The spatial overlap between both contacts within cells has however limited the study of each type of contact. Here we show that with "stampcils" focal contacts and hemidesmosomes can be spatially separated: cells are plated within the cavities of a stencil and the grids of the stencil serve as stamps for grafting an extracellular matrix protein-fibronectin. Cells engage new contacts on stamped zones leading to the segregation of adhesions and their associated cytoskeletons, i.e., actin and intermediate filaments of keratins. This new method should provide new insights into cell contacts compositions and dynamics.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.271 · 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