MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997986238 · doi:10.1002/jbt.20085

Reciprocal inhibition of Cd and Pb sulfocomplexes for uptake in Caco‐2 cells

2005· article· en· W1997986238 on OpenAlexaff
Ismaël Aduayom, Catherine Jumarie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryCadmiumMetalBiophysicsBiochemistryMolecular biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cadmium-lead interactions for uptake were studied in the TC7 clone of human enterocytic-like Caco-2 cells as a function of inorganic metal speciation. We have previously shown that Cd uptake in these cells involves both the free cation Cd2+ and chlorocomplex (CdCln(2-n)) species. Here we show 1.9 times higher uptake levels for 109CdCln(2-n) compared to 210PbCln(2-n). Reciprocal inhibitions of chlorocomplexes were observed with a much higher inhibitory effect of Cd compared to Pb. Replacing Cl- by NO3- increased both the level of aquo ion 109Cd2+ and 109Cd accumulation. In contrast, higher levels of 210Pb2+ did not favor 210Pb uptake. For both metals, higher uptake data were recorded in the presence of SO4(2-), leading to sulfocomplex formation, compared with Cl-. Reciprocal inhibitions were minimal at high-cation levels but were significant and comparable in the presence of sulfo-complexes. We conclude that, in addition to Cd2+ (but not Pb2+), sulfocomplexes of both metals would preferentially be taken up compared to chlorocomplexes. NRAMP2 is not involved in Pb2+ uptake, and the NRAMP2-mediated Cd2+ uptake is insensitive to Pb. Uptake of Pb chlorocomplexes could involve specific mechanisms but of very low affinity, whereas uptake of Pb sulfocomplexes occurs with high affinity.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biochemical and Molecular ToxicologySame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207