MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003016286 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.12.025

Homeostatic Control of Memory Cell Progenitors in the Natural Killer Cell Lineage

2015· article· en· W2003016286 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yosuke Kamimura, Lewis L. Lanier

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmune Cell Function and Interaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesUniversity of California, San FranciscoNational Institutes of HealthMcGill University
KeywordsBiologyProgenitor cellCell biologyInterleukin 21Lymphokine-activated killer cellInterleukin 12Interleukin 15ImmunologyCellNatural killer cellNatural killer T cellMemory T cellJanus kinase 3Stem cellCytotoxic T cellImmune systemT cellInterleukinCytokineGeneticsIn vitro

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have demonstrated that natural killer (NK) cells are able to undergo clonal expansion and contraction and to generate self-renewing memory cells after infection with mouse cytomegalovirus (MCMV). It is unclear whether all or only certain subsets preferentially contribute to the generation of memory NK cells. Here, we show that memory NK cells predominantly arise from killer cell lectin-like receptor G1 (KLRG1)-negative NK cell progenitors, whereas KLRG1-positive NK cells have limited capacity for expansion during infection with MCMV. Unexpectedly, the frequency of KLRG1-positive NK cells is significantly affected by the presence of T cells in the host and potentially by the host microbiota. Our findings demonstrate that excessive availability of interleukin (IL)-15 may erode the pool of memory progenitors, resulting in the decreased efficiency of memory generation in the NK cell lineage.

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)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations69
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicImmune Cell Function and InteractionFrench-language works237,207