MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999744824 · doi:10.1038/icb.2009.90

Cross, but not direct, presentation of cell‐associated virus antigens by spleen macrophages is influenced by their differentiation state

2009· article· en· W1999744824 on OpenAlexaff
Attiya Alatery, Sarah Siddiqui, Matthew C. Chan, Agnieszka Kuś, Elaine O. Petrof, Sameh Basta

Bibliographic record

VenueImmunology and Cell Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsOttawa Regional Cancer FoundationQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphocytic choriomeningitisAntigenPriming (agriculture)Cross-presentationSpleenAntigen presentationBiologyImmune systemCell biologyCellImmunologyVirusT cellVirologyCD8Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The initiation of T-cell immune responses requires professional antigen-presenting cells. Emerging data point towards an important role for macrophages (Mphi) in the priming of naïve T cells. In this study we analyzed the efficiency and the mechanisms by which Mphi derived from spleen (Sp-Mphi) or bone marrow (BM-Mphi) present Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) antigens to epitope-specific T cells. We demonstrate that because of phagosomal maturation, Sp-Mphi downregulate their ability to cross-present cell-associated, but not soluble, antigens, as they are further differentiated in culture without altering their capacity to directly present virus antigens after infection. We propose that Sp-Mphi are extremely efficient at direct and cross-presentation. However, if these cells undergo further M-CSF-dependent maturation, they will adapt to be more scavenger and phagocytic and concurrently reduce their cross-presenting capacity. Accordingly, Sp-Mphi can have an important role in regulating T-cell responses through cross-presentation depending on their differentiation state.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImmunology and Cell BiologySame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207